Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

[CheckMate]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
jmood88 said:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
They are not very acurate when it comes to the "Voice" of the people. What I see in a lot of these reviewers Propaganda is just that. And if you believe everything you read as the"Gospel Truth",then my friend you have got to start hangin' out and kickin' it with the guys who really play the Games and not those "Desk Jockeyes" who peck away furiously in order to make Press dead lines for you to jump on the band-wagon with.

It takes more than a couple of Games to say how it feels and plays and IMO to get that You've to play that game and have some clue as to what you're doing.

The only people I know with that capability are real die hard Gamers. So with hundreds of hours of game play I would think the Gamer and not the Reviewer would know what he's talkin' about.

Some stuff they print is OK not all of them are correct and misrepresent the "Voice" of the people
people. If you played the Game for days in your basement for weeks at a time only coming up for the occassional bath room break some people would think you were some kinda' nerd. But if you ask this guy what his views of whatever Game he's been playing are he'd write a review so imformative you'd think he was the guy who programed,wrote and produced it.

Thats the guy whos review I want to here or read because he's got hours and days of actual hands on experience. So once again I say "Don't Believe The Hype". Play the game and seek out other Gamers for a real review of whats really goin' on.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
GO BUCKEYES

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

But whenever there is a review that gives live a higher score people talk about how great the review is.

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

And the same can be said about ESPN.

[Rickster101]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

If you are refering to the "people" on this board then you're in good company they know what they'er takin' about. If you mean people as in the "10" or "12" year old so called video thumb blisterig champs no way I'm gonna take his word as "Gospel Truth"

Not all people get into Video Games like most of the guys on this Board do, there is no Smack talk here,what you'll find are some of the best reviewers in the World, hell this is the Internet where the "Voice" of the "People" actually exist.

And if you read our post you'll see for yourself how good these guys are. The "best" Reviews are right here in this format for all the "World" to see.

Props to all the Gamers who dare to post their thoughts,ideas,game stategies,hints,clues...you name it We Game it.

So I'm saying the Best reviews come from the best "People". And most are guys like the ones on this board who "Play" to win and truly understand the Game and are better qualfied to do a real unbiased review. These are just my opinions and in no way should be taken as to misrepresent this site or this board.

However as a member I'm glad to have this forum to speak freely and express my said views.
GO BUCKEYES

[Rickster101]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

If you are refering to the "people" on this board then you're in good company they know what they'er takin' about. If you mean people as in the "10" or "12" year old so called video thumb blisterig champs no way I'm gonna take his word as "Gospel Truth"

Not all people get into Video Games like most of the guys on this Board do, there is no Smack talk here,what you'll find are some of the best reviewers in the World, hell this is the Internet where the "Voice" of the "People" actually exist.

And if you read our post you'll see for yourself how good these guys are. The "best" Reviews are right here in this format for all the "World" to see.

Props to all the Gamers who dare to post their thoughts,ideas,game stategies,hints,clues...you name it We Game it.

So I'm saying the Best reviews come from the best "People". And most are guys like the ones on this board who "Play" to win and truly understand the Game and are better qualfied to do a real unbiased review. These are just my opinions and in no way should be taken as to misrepresent this site or this board.

However as a member I'm glad to have this forum to speak freely and express my said views.
GO BUCKEYES

[Rickster101]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

If you are refering to the "people" on this board then you're in good company they know what they'er takin' about. If you mean people as in the "10" or "12" year old so called video thumb blisterig champs no way I'm gonna take his word as "Gospel Truth"

Not all people get into Video Games like most of the guys on this Board do, there is no Smack talk here,what you'll find are some of the best reviewers in the World, hell this is the Internet where the "Voice" of the "People" actually exist.

And if you read our post you'll see for yourself how good these guys are. The "best" Reviews are right here in this format for all the "World" to see.

Props to all the Gamers who dare to post their thoughts,ideas,game stategies,hints,clues...you name it We Game it.

So I'm saying the Best reviews come from the best "People". And most are guys like the ones on this board who "Play" to win and truly understand the Game and are better qualfied to do a real unbiased review. These are just my opinions and in no way should be taken as to misrepresent this site or this board.

However as a member I'm glad to have this forum to speak freely and express my said views.
GO BUCKEYES

[Kanobi]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
They are not very acurate when it comes to the "Voice" of the people. What I see in a lot of these reviewers Propaganda is just that.

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

You wouldn't call it propaganda if 9 out of the 11 sites/mags mentioned in the original post rated Live higher than espnba.

I agree that gamer's reviews are important as well but even then you ultimately decide for yourSELF how good the game is.

Either way ..I could see trying to discredit the score of 1or 2 offbeat sites/mags but 9 out of 11 notable sites/mags is rather difficult to discount and disregard as mere propaganda from "inexperienced" and "unknowledgable" writers.

If you choose to IGNORE the reviews thats fine but don't immediately try and discredit the reviewer or the site/mag and/or question their knowledge of said sport or sportsgame genre simply because your game of choice was not tabbed as being the best. I think thats rather sad and childish.

[Kanobi]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
They are not very acurate when it comes to the "Voice" of the people. What I see in a lot of these reviewers Propaganda is just that.

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

You wouldn't call it propaganda if 9 out of the 11 sites/mags mentioned in the original post rated Live higher than espnba.

I agree that gamer's reviews are important as well but even then you ultimately decide for yourSELF how good the game is.

Either way ..I could see trying to discredit the score of 1or 2 offbeat sites/mags but 9 out of 11 notable sites/mags is rather difficult to discount and disregard as mere propaganda from "inexperienced" and "unknowledgable" writers.

If you choose to IGNORE the reviews thats fine but don't immediately try and discredit the reviewer or the site/mag and/or question their knowledge of said sport or sportsgame genre simply because your game of choice was not tabbed as being the best. I think thats rather sad and childish.

[Kanobi]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
They are not very acurate when it comes to the "Voice" of the people. What I see in a lot of these reviewers Propaganda is just that.

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

You wouldn't call it propaganda if 9 out of the 11 sites/mags mentioned in the original post rated Live higher than espnba.

I agree that gamer's reviews are important as well but even then you ultimately decide for yourSELF how good the game is.

Either way ..I could see trying to discredit the score of 1or 2 offbeat sites/mags but 9 out of 11 notable sites/mags is rather difficult to discount and disregard as mere propaganda from "inexperienced" and "unknowledgable" writers.

If you choose to IGNORE the reviews thats fine but don't immediately try and discredit the reviewer or the site/mag and/or question their knowledge of said sport or sportsgame genre simply because your game of choice was not tabbed as being the best. I think thats rather sad and childish.

[Rickster101]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

No! no! no! don't get me wrong I myself find some reviewers to be most imformative. I'm speaking on what they print or post to be taken as the final "Word" it is not.

And true they do spill out those numbers that do not IMO reflect the majority of the "Hard Core Gamer". I have no real beef or gripe against the reviewer himself,I just don't believe everything they print. Their proof is in the numbers they put up.

And yes you can say the numbers don't lie but who are they really counting and representing, its like whatever Game sells the most must be the best. A real Gamer knows thats just not true,and checks out the game himself.

I have "read" reviews gone out and puchased said games based on a review and had gotten "Burned" because I didn't check it out myself and go to return it only get some type of store policy that won't give back the full value of what I purchased and play "Lets make a Deal", so I wind up being screwed out of my hard earned cash because of what a review said.

Some are good most are not at giving the Gamer the full story behind the Game.

For example "NBA LIVE" is in my opinion is a very customizable Game would you agree?

But if you're into Arcade or Streetball it might not appeal to you. If its simulation basketball then thats where you want to go.

But hey its both and should be reviewed as the best all around "Basketball" on the market based on the fact of it having a versital range for all Gamers Arcade and Simulation.

Now if a reviewer isn't into different styles of play and leans toward one or the other he doesn't see the game as such and will write what I'd call with a unfair review.

I now only use reviews as a Maybe yes, maybe no, type of tool and read,surf and check forums to seek out other Gamers to hear what their "Views" are and I find them more imformative then the actual reviewer.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
GO BUCKEYES

[Rickster101]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

No! no! no! don't get me wrong I myself find some reviewers to be most imformative. I'm speaking on what they print or post to be taken as the final "Word" it is not.

And true they do spill out those numbers that do not IMO reflect the majority of the "Hard Core Gamer". I have no real beef or gripe against the reviewer himself,I just don't believe everything they print. Their proof is in the numbers they put up.

And yes you can say the numbers don't lie but who are they really counting and representing, its like whatever Game sells the most must be the best. A real Gamer knows thats just not true,and checks out the game himself.

I have "read" reviews gone out and puchased said games based on a review and had gotten "Burned" because I didn't check it out myself and go to return it only get some type of store policy that won't give back the full value of what I purchased and play "Lets make a Deal", so I wind up being screwed out of my hard earned cash because of what a review said.

Some are good most are not at giving the Gamer the full story behind the Game.

For example "NBA LIVE" is in my opinion is a very customizable Game would you agree?

But if you're into Arcade or Streetball it might not appeal to you. If its simulation basketball then thats where you want to go.

But hey its both and should be reviewed as the best all around "Basketball" on the market based on the fact of it having a versital range for all Gamers Arcade and Simulation.

Now if a reviewer isn't into different styles of play and leans toward one or the other he doesn't see the game as such and will write what I'd call with a unfair review.

I now only use reviews as a Maybe yes, maybe no, type of tool and read,surf and check forums to seek out other Gamers to hear what their "Views" are and I find them more imformative then the actual reviewer.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
GO BUCKEYES

[Rickster101]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

No! no! no! don't get me wrong I myself find some reviewers to be most imformative. I'm speaking on what they print or post to be taken as the final "Word" it is not.

And true they do spill out those numbers that do not IMO reflect the majority of the "Hard Core Gamer". I have no real beef or gripe against the reviewer himself,I just don't believe everything they print. Their proof is in the numbers they put up.

And yes you can say the numbers don't lie but who are they really counting and representing, its like whatever Game sells the most must be the best. A real Gamer knows thats just not true,and checks out the game himself.

I have "read" reviews gone out and puchased said games based on a review and had gotten "Burned" because I didn't check it out myself and go to return it only get some type of store policy that won't give back the full value of what I purchased and play "Lets make a Deal", so I wind up being screwed out of my hard earned cash because of what a review said.

Some are good most are not at giving the Gamer the full story behind the Game.

For example "NBA LIVE" is in my opinion is a very customizable Game would you agree?

But if you're into Arcade or Streetball it might not appeal to you. If its simulation basketball then thats where you want to go.

But hey its both and should be reviewed as the best all around "Basketball" on the market based on the fact of it having a versital range for all Gamers Arcade and Simulation.

Now if a reviewer isn't into different styles of play and leans toward one or the other he doesn't see the game as such and will write what I'd call with a unfair review.

I now only use reviews as a Maybe yes, maybe no, type of tool and read,surf and check forums to seek out other Gamers to hear what their "Views" are and I find them more imformative then the actual reviewer.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
GO BUCKEYES

[Kanobi]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
No! no! no! don't get me wrong I myself find some reviewers to be most imformative. I'm speaking on what they print or post to be taken as the final "Word" it is not.

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

I certainly agee there. But when you have 9 out of 11 rather notable sites giving espnba the nod then one can't help but to wonder.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:

For example "NBA LIVE" is in my opinion is a very customizable Game would you agree?

But if you're into Arcade or Streetball it might not appeal to you. If its simulation basketball then thats where you want to go.

But hey its both and should be reviewed as the best all around "Basketball" on the market based on the fact of it having a versital range for all Gamers Arcade and Simulation.

Now if a reviewer isn't into different styles of play and leans toward one or the other he doesn't see the game as such and will write what I'd call with a unfair review.

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

But see thats the thing...this is YOUR opinion and if the Reviewer doesn't see the game as you see it then you feel their review was "unfair"? I think the scores Live has gotten are pretty good for the most part which is also why I don't see how any Live fans can be upset with the scores OTHER than the fact the Live scores were mostly lower than scores for ESPNBA...thats what I'm talking about.

If you like Live and feel its a good game then thats cool. I'd think you and others would be satisfied with the scores its received 4.5/5 ...8.5 or 9/10 which are pretty good scores for a game. However, it seems the only reason people turn to discredit the Reviews is because Live wasn't rated te Best and again IMO this is very Childish. Do you get what I'm saying now?

I'm not saying that Reviewers' word is Final. I'm saying its rather sad when people attack the reviews that don't score their game of choice as being better than the competition. But when their Game of choice is reviewed and scored higher than the competiton... all of a sudden we have a Reputable reviewer who knows their stuff. Thats B.S.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
I now only use reviews as a Maybe yes, maybe no, type of tool and read,surf and check forums to seek out other Gamers to hear what their "Views" are and I find them more imformative then the actual reviewer.

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

I do the same. But the thing with other Gamers' reviews is that they to are rather jerk reactions and impressions of the game. I find it rather hilarious how guys hit boards with the "Okay...I just played 5 solid games and here's my review" B.S.

I'm not swayed by reader reviews because they usually haven't taken time to learn the game, have changed the sliders, have some prejudice or bias towards the game based on previous editions or the typical Company/Developer/Publisher loyalty, and will later change from their initial thoughts because they are discovering new things about the game that either detract or improve on their initial experience with the game. All this stuff has to be taken into account when reading a "Fellow Gamer's" reviem or impressions of a game.

Thats why I feel its best to just play games for yourself and then decide since your experience with the game is what matters most. I see Reviews, Site/mag or Gamer, merely as a means of getting information...not as someting that is to be championed as the overall truth nor as a means of telling me which game I should like and enjoy.

[Kanobi]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
No! no! no! don't get me wrong I myself find some reviewers to be most imformative. I'm speaking on what they print or post to be taken as the final "Word" it is not.

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

I certainly agee there. But when you have 9 out of 11 rather notable sites giving espnba the nod then one can't help but to wonder.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:

For example "NBA LIVE" is in my opinion is a very customizable Game would you agree?

But if you're into Arcade or Streetball it might not appeal to you. If its simulation basketball then thats where you want to go.

But hey its both and should be reviewed as the best all around "Basketball" on the market based on the fact of it having a versital range for all Gamers Arcade and Simulation.

Now if a reviewer isn't into different styles of play and leans toward one or the other he doesn't see the game as such and will write what I'd call with a unfair review.

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

But see thats the thing...this is YOUR opinion and if the Reviewer doesn't see the game as you see it then you feel their review was "unfair"? I think the scores Live has gotten are pretty good for the most part which is also why I don't see how any Live fans can be upset with the scores OTHER than the fact the Live scores were mostly lower than scores for ESPNBA...thats what I'm talking about.

If you like Live and feel its a good game then thats cool. I'd think you and others would be satisfied with the scores its received 4.5/5 ...8.5 or 9/10 which are pretty good scores for a game. However, it seems the only reason people turn to discredit the Reviews is because Live wasn't rated te Best and again IMO this is very Childish. Do you get what I'm saying now?

I'm not saying that Reviewers' word is Final. I'm saying its rather sad when people attack the reviews that don't score their game of choice as being better than the competition. But when their Game of choice is reviewed and scored higher than the competiton... all of a sudden we have a Reputable reviewer who knows their stuff. Thats B.S.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
I now only use reviews as a Maybe yes, maybe no, type of tool and read,surf and check forums to seek out other Gamers to hear what their "Views" are and I find them more imformative then the actual reviewer.

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

I do the same. But the thing with other Gamers' reviews is that they to are rather jerk reactions and impressions of the game. I find it rather hilarious how guys hit boards with the "Okay...I just played 5 solid games and here's my review" B.S.

I'm not swayed by reader reviews because they usually haven't taken time to learn the game, have changed the sliders, have some prejudice or bias towards the game based on previous editions or the typical Company/Developer/Publisher loyalty, and will later change from their initial thoughts because they are discovering new things about the game that either detract or improve on their initial experience with the game. All this stuff has to be taken into account when reading a "Fellow Gamer's" reviem or impressions of a game.

Thats why I feel its best to just play games for yourself and then decide since your experience with the game is what matters most. I see Reviews, Site/mag or Gamer, merely as a means of getting information...not as someting that is to be championed as the overall truth nor as a means of telling me which game I should like and enjoy.

[Kanobi]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
No! no! no! don't get me wrong I myself find some reviewers to be most imformative. I'm speaking on what they print or post to be taken as the final "Word" it is not.

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

I certainly agee there. But when you have 9 out of 11 rather notable sites giving espnba the nod then one can't help but to wonder.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:

For example "NBA LIVE" is in my opinion is a very customizable Game would you agree?

But if you're into Arcade or Streetball it might not appeal to you. If its simulation basketball then thats where you want to go.

But hey its both and should be reviewed as the best all around "Basketball" on the market based on the fact of it having a versital range for all Gamers Arcade and Simulation.

Now if a reviewer isn't into different styles of play and leans toward one or the other he doesn't see the game as such and will write what I'd call with a unfair review.

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

But see thats the thing...this is YOUR opinion and if the Reviewer doesn't see the game as you see it then you feel their review was "unfair"? I think the scores Live has gotten are pretty good for the most part which is also why I don't see how any Live fans can be upset with the scores OTHER than the fact the Live scores were mostly lower than scores for ESPNBA...thats what I'm talking about.

If you like Live and feel its a good game then thats cool. I'd think you and others would be satisfied with the scores its received 4.5/5 ...8.5 or 9/10 which are pretty good scores for a game. However, it seems the only reason people turn to discredit the Reviews is because Live wasn't rated te Best and again IMO this is very Childish. Do you get what I'm saying now?

I'm not saying that Reviewers' word is Final. I'm saying its rather sad when people attack the reviews that don't score their game of choice as being better than the competition. But when their Game of choice is reviewed and scored higher than the competiton... all of a sudden we have a Reputable reviewer who knows their stuff. Thats B.S.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Rickster101 said:
I now only use reviews as a Maybe yes, maybe no, type of tool and read,surf and check forums to seek out other Gamers to hear what their "Views" are and I find them more imformative then the actual reviewer.

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

I do the same. But the thing with other Gamers' reviews is that they to are rather jerk reactions and impressions of the game. I find it rather hilarious how guys hit boards with the "Okay...I just played 5 solid games and here's my review" B.S.

I'm not swayed by reader reviews because they usually haven't taken time to learn the game, have changed the sliders, have some prejudice or bias towards the game based on previous editions or the typical Company/Developer/Publisher loyalty, and will later change from their initial thoughts because they are discovering new things about the game that either detract or improve on their initial experience with the game. All this stuff has to be taken into account when reading a "Fellow Gamer's" reviem or impressions of a game.

Thats why I feel its best to just play games for yourself and then decide since your experience with the game is what matters most. I see Reviews, Site/mag or Gamer, merely as a means of getting information...not as someting that is to be championed as the overall truth nor as a means of telling me which game I should like and enjoy.

[wawasman]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John &amp; Kanobi ....im kidding man, actually you make some excellent points...it just struck me as funny...peace

[wawasman]

Re: Critics on the ESPN vs Live debate

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John &amp; Kanobi ....im kidding man, actually you make some excellent points...it just struck me as funny...peace