Xbox Live Arcade - games review
by Hokuto · in General Discussion · 08/12/2005 (7:15 am) · 55 replies
Eurogamer has an aritcle about Xbox Live Arcade with mini review of mini games
They are pretty harsh with Think Tanks, only 1/10
and
Marble Blast only 5/10
www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=60366
oh well....
it is only the start... surely the next time around there will be more good games to talk about.
They are pretty harsh with Think Tanks, only 1/10
and
Marble Blast only 5/10
www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=60366
oh well....
it is only the start... surely the next time around there will be more good games to talk about.
#22
Think Tanks - he's wrong, dead wrong, end of story.
Marble Blast - He's pretty much right on the money. I would have given it a 6 probably, but Marble Blast is nothing beyond average. Yes it was fun, it makes for an amazing drinking game with the buddies, but all in all it leaves an empty feeling inside. You wish there was more. A two-player option with no split-screen (on the same screen at once, Marble Madness style) would have been excellent. Marble Blast just needed that final little oomph to take it from average to above average. I bought it, played it for awhile, and now it only goes back in the XBox after we are completely wasted and need a good laugh. Unfortunately, when I go buy Super Monkey Ball Deluxe this afternoon (I can't believe I don't have that game yet) I feel Marble Blast will never see the light green glow of my XBox again.
Sorry GG, it was fun while it lasted, but there are more fulfilling options for that sort of game.
08/12/2005 (3:04 pm)
I approached this review expecting to be in the same category as the rest of you, unfortunately I almost agree with the guy.Think Tanks - he's wrong, dead wrong, end of story.
Marble Blast - He's pretty much right on the money. I would have given it a 6 probably, but Marble Blast is nothing beyond average. Yes it was fun, it makes for an amazing drinking game with the buddies, but all in all it leaves an empty feeling inside. You wish there was more. A two-player option with no split-screen (on the same screen at once, Marble Madness style) would have been excellent. Marble Blast just needed that final little oomph to take it from average to above average. I bought it, played it for awhile, and now it only goes back in the XBox after we are completely wasted and need a good laugh. Unfortunately, when I go buy Super Monkey Ball Deluxe this afternoon (I can't believe I don't have that game yet) I feel Marble Blast will never see the light green glow of my XBox again.
Sorry GG, it was fun while it lasted, but there are more fulfilling options for that sort of game.
#23
Read back over the last few comments to my post. You will notice that you are the only one who took the full quote and didn't take it out of context as Chris sadly did.
My point is that everyone seems to be so quick to try to rubbish the reviewer. This to me does not say "we are taking critisism seriously" and I doubt it says that to you either. I don't mind having other developers disagree/agree with my opinions or what games I make. I don't take those opionions anywhere as seriously as I do the opinions of my intended audience or impartial reviewers.
The reviewer of this article is a bit of a recognised idiot. He always has been simply because he will often critisise and then give a seemingly contradictory score at the end. That isn't up for debate. It also does not make his conclusions any the less valid as the score usially turns out to be about right (though it does make him harder to listen to).
Ultimately a games sales are what signal it's success or failure as sleeper hits like POP prove. Also any advertised game will sell to some degree no matter how bad it is. The downside of this is that for every sale the buyer will tell on average about 10 others of the merits or faults of the product. Even Pariah sold a few copies here and there (sorry to keep picking of Pariah for anyone who did get the game)!
I also didn't single out GG in these posts, though everyone seemed to think that was who my comments were aimed at (why is that?). I think GG do take notice of critisism. I don't think most other developers on this site do however. I'm also worried when poeple don't get why games like BeJeweled fair better on an arcade platform than 3rd person shooters. Did anyone here ever go to an arcade (they are rare now I know but, most people I know still remember what they were like). Did anyone who went to an arcade ever play a third person shooter there?
Arcade style games will fair well on XBox arcade. They are simple, quick to download and fast and fun to play. Arcade is meant for such games so I wasn't suprised by the scores given. If the same reviewer had reviewed TT on a PC I'm sure the results would have been different. I have to say (flame me if you must) that I found TT on xbox live to be dull and the controls didn't feel at all right. Aiming was a chore and I often died more because I got shot from god knows where with some bouncy bullet than by anyone deliberately aiming at me! I don't remember the PC version being like that at all!
edit for grammar (well one bit anyway)
08/12/2005 (3:15 pm)
@JoeRead back over the last few comments to my post. You will notice that you are the only one who took the full quote and didn't take it out of context as Chris sadly did.
My point is that everyone seems to be so quick to try to rubbish the reviewer. This to me does not say "we are taking critisism seriously" and I doubt it says that to you either. I don't mind having other developers disagree/agree with my opinions or what games I make. I don't take those opionions anywhere as seriously as I do the opinions of my intended audience or impartial reviewers.
The reviewer of this article is a bit of a recognised idiot. He always has been simply because he will often critisise and then give a seemingly contradictory score at the end. That isn't up for debate. It also does not make his conclusions any the less valid as the score usially turns out to be about right (though it does make him harder to listen to).
Ultimately a games sales are what signal it's success or failure as sleeper hits like POP prove. Also any advertised game will sell to some degree no matter how bad it is. The downside of this is that for every sale the buyer will tell on average about 10 others of the merits or faults of the product. Even Pariah sold a few copies here and there (sorry to keep picking of Pariah for anyone who did get the game)!
I also didn't single out GG in these posts, though everyone seemed to think that was who my comments were aimed at (why is that?). I think GG do take notice of critisism. I don't think most other developers on this site do however. I'm also worried when poeple don't get why games like BeJeweled fair better on an arcade platform than 3rd person shooters. Did anyone here ever go to an arcade (they are rare now I know but, most people I know still remember what they were like). Did anyone who went to an arcade ever play a third person shooter there?
Arcade style games will fair well on XBox arcade. They are simple, quick to download and fast and fun to play. Arcade is meant for such games so I wasn't suprised by the scores given. If the same reviewer had reviewed TT on a PC I'm sure the results would have been different. I have to say (flame me if you must) that I found TT on xbox live to be dull and the controls didn't feel at all right. Aiming was a chore and I often died more because I got shot from god knows where with some bouncy bullet than by anyone deliberately aiming at me! I don't remember the PC version being like that at all!
edit for grammar (well one bit anyway)
#24
Where, exactly, do you get a review from this? A review lists reasons why the game is good and why the game is bad, and expounds upon it. A review does not simply go " Uh, it suck hehe" as this "review" did.
What exactly were the TT makers supposed to learn and take to heart from that?
08/12/2005 (3:47 pm)
What I said was NOT taken out of context, the guy is not pesenting a review, more a school yard idiot, who, rather than take the time to express himself, just spouts off useless ravings...Quote:An appallingly limited multiplayer online deathmatch game with floaty tanks and some of the worst 3D graphics we've ever seen on an Xbox. At no stage in the history of gaming has this sort of sub-par drivel been acceptable. Neeeeeext.
Where, exactly, do you get a review from this? A review lists reasons why the game is good and why the game is bad, and expounds upon it. A review does not simply go " Uh, it suck hehe" as this "review" did.
What exactly were the TT makers supposed to learn and take to heart from that?
#25
that is a little bit of a leap. I take criticism seriously. I listen to all feedback. In the context of what he was writing (a slam on XBLA) I did not expect to take the review at face value, especially as he was putting the 'what XBLA *should* be spin on the whole thing. I do not know if that is what the buying public or microsoft is thinking in terms of what it should be. Sales numbers will tell the tale. You have made the conclusion that since people are slamming the reviewer that they don't take it seriously. In the context of the article, and given that he is one person who may or may not represent the target audience.. and that he really had no data to back it up.. I don't know what valuable information I could get from his comments.
Mostly because you are here on GarageGames, the first post in the thread is about thinktanks and marble blast. You are giving advice to the developers (that being me), and doing so in a very authoratiative way. I simply responded to say.. whoah now everyone.. don't go overboard makign conclusions from one data source. Maybe it is the arcade games that will be a hit on XBLA and XBLA 360.. maybe it will be other titles. No one knows for sure as the service is too young, and with xbox 360 around the corner, with XBLA in the dashboard, the demographic might change drastically. Time will tell the tale.
I usually don't respond to threads like this but the topic is very important to me. Feedback is great. All data is good. Giving too much weight to data from one source can lead you to make seriously bad conclusions.
If you have data on what the XBLA users are looking to get from XBLA, please post the data. That I would find useful. Giving up your opinion (that happens to match the reviewers) as law.. that is not all that useful to me. It only gives me two opinions. I have others telling me things about what they want XBLA to be (my wife and my sisters husband for instance) who's opinion is in stark contrast to yours.
If you have the inside scoop on what the XBLA crowd wants.. let us know the info and how you got it. Making a statement that 'these games like this will do well' and not having any data to back it up is not doing anyone any favors. He represents his opinion as fact.. you represent yours as fact.
As a designer who often has to parse feedback from many sources, I recognize that all feedback is good.. but not all feedback is (or should be) turned into an action item.
ThinkTanks never was and never will be all things to all people. It is a game with a very specific intent and target audience, and those that 'get it' love it. Those that don't.. well they don't. I am not be ignorant here.. we set out to target a niche.. we hit it. We did not devote a ton of ressources trying to be all things to everyone and satisfy the needs of the large % of the purchasing audience (who already has an abundance of titles to choose from).
You are giving advice to the developers of games for XBLA. Right now, that is the Marble Blast and Thinktanks teams (soon to be Orbz as well).. you are advising us to take heed.. to learn.. it really comes across as preachy and I think it misrepresents the teams that worked on those titles as being ignorant of the issues or the target audience. From a personal perspective, I can tell you that this is not the case. I am not freaking out or slamming the guy.. nor am I taking his word as law. I read the review, filed it away in my brain, and will take it into consideration when more data is available. Until then, it is too early to draw any conclusions.
08/12/2005 (4:03 pm)
Quote:My point is that everyone seems to be so quick to try to rubbish the reviewer. This to me does not say "we are taking critisism seriously" and I doubt it says that to you either.
that is a little bit of a leap. I take criticism seriously. I listen to all feedback. In the context of what he was writing (a slam on XBLA) I did not expect to take the review at face value, especially as he was putting the 'what XBLA *should* be spin on the whole thing. I do not know if that is what the buying public or microsoft is thinking in terms of what it should be. Sales numbers will tell the tale. You have made the conclusion that since people are slamming the reviewer that they don't take it seriously. In the context of the article, and given that he is one person who may or may not represent the target audience.. and that he really had no data to back it up.. I don't know what valuable information I could get from his comments.
Quote:I also didn't single out GG in this review, though everyone seemed to think that was who my comments were aimed at (why is that?).
Mostly because you are here on GarageGames, the first post in the thread is about thinktanks and marble blast. You are giving advice to the developers (that being me), and doing so in a very authoratiative way. I simply responded to say.. whoah now everyone.. don't go overboard makign conclusions from one data source. Maybe it is the arcade games that will be a hit on XBLA and XBLA 360.. maybe it will be other titles. No one knows for sure as the service is too young, and with xbox 360 around the corner, with XBLA in the dashboard, the demographic might change drastically. Time will tell the tale.
I usually don't respond to threads like this but the topic is very important to me. Feedback is great. All data is good. Giving too much weight to data from one source can lead you to make seriously bad conclusions.
If you have data on what the XBLA users are looking to get from XBLA, please post the data. That I would find useful. Giving up your opinion (that happens to match the reviewers) as law.. that is not all that useful to me. It only gives me two opinions. I have others telling me things about what they want XBLA to be (my wife and my sisters husband for instance) who's opinion is in stark contrast to yours.
If you have the inside scoop on what the XBLA crowd wants.. let us know the info and how you got it. Making a statement that 'these games like this will do well' and not having any data to back it up is not doing anyone any favors. He represents his opinion as fact.. you represent yours as fact.
As a designer who often has to parse feedback from many sources, I recognize that all feedback is good.. but not all feedback is (or should be) turned into an action item.
ThinkTanks never was and never will be all things to all people. It is a game with a very specific intent and target audience, and those that 'get it' love it. Those that don't.. well they don't. I am not be ignorant here.. we set out to target a niche.. we hit it. We did not devote a ton of ressources trying to be all things to everyone and satisfy the needs of the large % of the purchasing audience (who already has an abundance of titles to choose from).
You are giving advice to the developers of games for XBLA. Right now, that is the Marble Blast and Thinktanks teams (soon to be Orbz as well).. you are advising us to take heed.. to learn.. it really comes across as preachy and I think it misrepresents the teams that worked on those titles as being ignorant of the issues or the target audience. From a personal perspective, I can tell you that this is not the case. I am not freaking out or slamming the guy.. nor am I taking his word as law. I read the review, filed it away in my brain, and will take it into consideration when more data is available. Until then, it is too early to draw any conclusions.
#26
08/12/2005 (4:29 pm)
That reviewer's attitude reminds me of emulator runs. Try ever game in the list for 2-3 minutes, and whip up something in even less time. Oh well! I hope people are smart enough not to take him seriously. 1/10 for Think Tanks? Worst Xbox graphics ever? Welcome to the age where retards can write for magazines.
#27
I am not giving you advice except to say listen to your intended audience as a priority. I didn't start this thread and I'm suprised you seem to think I did. My info on Live arcade comes from Microsoft and their representatives and is not yet made public as you will already know. I am sure you get the same information from them that I do.
No game is all things to all people and that again brings me back to my advice of taking the advice and feedback of your intended audience as the only information that really matters. Reviewers represent your intended audience. Whether you like that fact or not isn't going to matter in the end.
Finally. No-one has said that one reviewer is the definitive source of feedback. Gamespy or IGN may love XBox live arcade and TT and give it a 5 star or 9/10 rating. I bet that you will be very quick to agree with that if/when it happens.
I didn't expect balanced views on the GG site. I would be a fool to do so. Ultimately everyone does what they want to do and I don't expect you to be any different.
08/12/2005 (4:39 pm)
@Joe I am not giving you advice except to say listen to your intended audience as a priority. I didn't start this thread and I'm suprised you seem to think I did. My info on Live arcade comes from Microsoft and their representatives and is not yet made public as you will already know. I am sure you get the same information from them that I do.
No game is all things to all people and that again brings me back to my advice of taking the advice and feedback of your intended audience as the only information that really matters. Reviewers represent your intended audience. Whether you like that fact or not isn't going to matter in the end.
Finally. No-one has said that one reviewer is the definitive source of feedback. Gamespy or IGN may love XBox live arcade and TT and give it a 5 star or 9/10 rating. I bet that you will be very quick to agree with that if/when it happens.
I didn't expect balanced views on the GG site. I would be a fool to do so. Ultimately everyone does what they want to do and I don't expect you to be any different.
#28
08/12/2005 (4:48 pm)
Personally this review reminds me of a some kid (no offense to those of younger age, "kid" in mentality not so much age) who just got done playing GTA and Doom3 and just picked up the XBLA games expecting the same shoot everything and mass violence with flashy graphics style. The author seems very naive and shortsighted with a completely biased and unrealstic measure. Its like if you downloaded Blender and drilled every little detail of why its not like 3DS Max or Maya, why it doesnt have as much support, etc. You have to use a proper measure when comparing something. I would probably disgregard this review completely if I was a developer of one of those games. The author already has preconceived notions of what these games "should" be rather than what they are, its as if the author set out to slam XBLA as much as possible to get a bunch of attention.
#29
The audience for Arcade are none of the following:-
Indie game enthusiasts
PC gamers
The intended audience will most likely have played games like GTA and Burnout and will expect quick thrills and non-brain intensive games. This is not to say they will not also like games which require some thought such as simple puzzle games (yea you read that right!)
I'm not going to say anymore except.. these are the opinions of me and no-one else and do not reflect my employers opinions or views in any way (legal denial schpeal over).
08/12/2005 (4:59 pm)
I can't disclose information not made public by Microsoft so I'll not even go in that direction. I will say simply this.The audience for Arcade are none of the following:-
Indie game enthusiasts
PC gamers
The intended audience will most likely have played games like GTA and Burnout and will expect quick thrills and non-brain intensive games. This is not to say they will not also like games which require some thought such as simple puzzle games (yea you read that right!)
I'm not going to say anymore except.. these are the opinions of me and no-one else and do not reflect my employers opinions or views in any way (legal denial schpeal over).
#30
Of course, thats a given... the word "Arcade" gives that away instantly. "Arcade" games aren't GTA or Burnout, they are smaller, less graphical, yet still fun games... moreso casual games. Most players realize this and can distinguish this. Most Xbox players I know don't go to XBLA and expect GTA or Burnout, those that do are doing so on purpose.
08/12/2005 (5:10 pm)
Quote:will expect quick thrills and non-brain intensive games.
Of course, thats a given... the word "Arcade" gives that away instantly. "Arcade" games aren't GTA or Burnout, they are smaller, less graphical, yet still fun games... moreso casual games. Most players realize this and can distinguish this. Most Xbox players I know don't go to XBLA and expect GTA or Burnout, those that do are doing so on purpose.
#31
I'm sorry. I am going to have to strongly disagree with that.
Most reviewers have many games/movies/books of numerous types/genres/styles come across their desks, most of which will not have them as the intended audience. The mark of a good and proffessional reviewer is that they can still give fair and consistent reviews even if they aren't the target audience and may not personally like the game/movie/book they are reviewing.
Surely you don't think your local newspaper's movie reviewer is the intended audience of both teeny-bop chick flicks and touch guy action movies?
It doesn't take much reading to figure out that this particular game reviewer rates games on how much he personally likes or dislikes the games with little consideration to the quality of the actual game. In the meantime several million dollars of revenue are flat out disproving his reviews of Zuma and Bejewled. He isn't the target audience of those games and gave them correspondingly low reviews/opinions but the hundreds of thousands of people who *are* the target audience have given their approval of these games in cold hard cash. Which do you think is a more valid "review"?
08/12/2005 (5:39 pm)
Quote:
Reviewers represent your intended audience.
I'm sorry. I am going to have to strongly disagree with that.
Most reviewers have many games/movies/books of numerous types/genres/styles come across their desks, most of which will not have them as the intended audience. The mark of a good and proffessional reviewer is that they can still give fair and consistent reviews even if they aren't the target audience and may not personally like the game/movie/book they are reviewing.
Surely you don't think your local newspaper's movie reviewer is the intended audience of both teeny-bop chick flicks and touch guy action movies?
It doesn't take much reading to figure out that this particular game reviewer rates games on how much he personally likes or dislikes the games with little consideration to the quality of the actual game. In the meantime several million dollars of revenue are flat out disproving his reviews of Zuma and Bejewled. He isn't the target audience of those games and gave them correspondingly low reviews/opinions but the hundreds of thousands of people who *are* the target audience have given their approval of these games in cold hard cash. Which do you think is a more valid "review"?
#32
"What's this supposed to be a joke or something!"
I will not mention what game he was playing (it wasn't a GG game though) but, it does sum up the attitude that most of the 100+ gamers had to the games in general. Mutant storm was played most and even a mini score competition was organised on it. The overall comments for Mutanst Storm were that it was simple but, got hard too quickly and later it was hard to see your ship properly. It was the only game people said they would buy (suprised us I can tell you!) and even then most thought it too expensive at the price it was selling at!
The service itself is liked by most but, the games on it at present are not really of a quality that gamers think is suitable for a console. I think Mutant gets away with it because the abstract graphics catch the eye while not having any particular real world style to compare them to.
Hey go do your own market research and testing. Talk to Microsoft (you may need to sign some stuff) and they will happily tell you what they expect from the next batch of Live arcade games.
Edited to add:
@Matt
Ok so you think reviewers don't represent your audience. What then is the issue with what this particular reviewer said? If he is not representative of anyone buying your games then no worries just ignore him and his kind. It is that simple.
08/12/2005 (5:41 pm)
Most XBox live gamers we have had through the test suite don't consider the games on XBox Live Arcade to be small and quick gratification games and to quote onbe of the testers"What's this supposed to be a joke or something!"
I will not mention what game he was playing (it wasn't a GG game though) but, it does sum up the attitude that most of the 100+ gamers had to the games in general. Mutant storm was played most and even a mini score competition was organised on it. The overall comments for Mutanst Storm were that it was simple but, got hard too quickly and later it was hard to see your ship properly. It was the only game people said they would buy (suprised us I can tell you!) and even then most thought it too expensive at the price it was selling at!
The service itself is liked by most but, the games on it at present are not really of a quality that gamers think is suitable for a console. I think Mutant gets away with it because the abstract graphics catch the eye while not having any particular real world style to compare them to.
Hey go do your own market research and testing. Talk to Microsoft (you may need to sign some stuff) and they will happily tell you what they expect from the next batch of Live arcade games.
Edited to add:
@Matt
Ok so you think reviewers don't represent your audience. What then is the issue with what this particular reviewer said? If he is not representative of anyone buying your games then no worries just ignore him and his kind. It is that simple.
#33
Um, listen, I know your anti GG and all, but do you really think Matt Fairfax Pat Wilson Etc Etc don't already have a rather large amount of info on Xbox 360 Arcade?
Little jibs like that to make your self sound important really piss me off BTW/.
08/12/2005 (5:45 pm)
Quote:Talk to Microsoft (you may need to sign some stuff)
Um, listen, I know your anti GG and all, but do you really think Matt Fairfax Pat Wilson Etc Etc don't already have a rather large amount of info on Xbox 360 Arcade?
Little jibs like that to make your self sound important really piss me off BTW/.
#34
08/12/2005 (5:55 pm)
Yes, let's all take a breath on this thread as well please! Everyone has differing opinions, and all are valid in one context or another, but discussions can become quite heated...just respect other's opinions for what they are, debate the merits of all sides, but keep it civil :)
#35
If I were anti GG I wouldn't have given them my money for TGE, TSE and T2D would I now.
The difference between you and me is that I have never been a fan-boy. I don't feel the need to agree with people simply to conform. I'm not afraid to say my opinion and I don't expect anyone at GG to agree with it either.
My post was general info for other developers. GG have already signed an NDA with Microsoft, otherwise they wouldn't have a 360 dev kit! It is suprising how many developers don't know that they can simply approach Microsoft and strike up a relationship with them. Clearly you were not aware of this if you though my remark was aimed at GG.
08/12/2005 (5:55 pm)
@ChrisIf I were anti GG I wouldn't have given them my money for TGE, TSE and T2D would I now.
The difference between you and me is that I have never been a fan-boy. I don't feel the need to agree with people simply to conform. I'm not afraid to say my opinion and I don't expect anyone at GG to agree with it either.
My post was general info for other developers. GG have already signed an NDA with Microsoft, otherwise they wouldn't have a 360 dev kit! It is suprising how many developers don't know that they can simply approach Microsoft and strike up a relationship with them. Clearly you were not aware of this if you though my remark was aimed at GG.
#36
08/12/2005 (6:00 pm)
Good point made by Stephen, we're all on the same side here :) lol I'll be the first one to admit I have some very strong opinions and have to keep them in check. I do think you have some very good points Peter, that one should take criticism and use it. Though in this case I think the author proves the value of opinion very low, there seems to be a very distinct bias in his tone that differentiates him from most gamers (at least that I know).
#37
Then people here call DooM3 a POS and go into denial about bad scores for Think Tanks, some thing is wrong. I think we need to realize making good games is HARD.
It's true that one or even many reviews do not give a perfect representation of the audience, but for goodness sake, let's stop bashing the "journalistic piece of trashand" just say "man, that sucks...maybe we can make it better"
@Joe
I know you don't think there were any 'mistakes' made with thinktanks, but try not to think of it as perfect. When I played the demo, I did not find it very fun at all. Oh well. you can just say "I wasn't your target market" or maybe improve on it till I too want to buy it. I dunno...
08/12/2005 (6:08 pm)
Is Peter the only one here with any sense?? Why does the indie industry go into denial about every bad review? Is it AT ALL POSSIBLE that the games may be, *gasp* BAD??!?Then people here call DooM3 a POS and go into denial about bad scores for Think Tanks, some thing is wrong. I think we need to realize making good games is HARD.
It's true that one or even many reviews do not give a perfect representation of the audience, but for goodness sake, let's stop bashing the "journalistic piece of trashand" just say "man, that sucks...maybe we can make it better"
@Joe
I know you don't think there were any 'mistakes' made with thinktanks, but try not to think of it as perfect. When I played the demo, I did not find it very fun at all. Oh well. you can just say "I wasn't your target market" or maybe improve on it till I too want to buy it. I dunno...
#38
Fair enough. There apparently was a miscommunication. While I do not agree with your position, I did not mean any disrespect. I am rewording my post and cleaning up the related part of the thread so that it can hopefully stay on track.
08/12/2005 (6:21 pm)
Peter,Fair enough. There apparently was a miscommunication. While I do not agree with your position, I did not mean any disrespect. I am rewording my post and cleaning up the related part of the thread so that it can hopefully stay on track.
#39
08/12/2005 (6:35 pm)
Maybe we can write to reviewers and get a list of things they felt could be improved about the games they rate. That way even the worst reviews have a purpose.
#40
Thats a completely non point / argument I am anti-UBI, but I own Far Cry( and play it several times a week ) , GR, GR2, Splinter Cell... ETC.
I'm refering to statements such as...
Kinda insulting when they've done so much for so many people, don't you think?
===============
You're 100% right, I'm nothing but a conformist GG fan boy who had no idea about GG and MS and their relation ship. Nope not a clue. But rember this... You're probably twice my age, and still work for a salary that increases a measly 3-4 % each year, while I'm 20, and have 9 months left on my -MASTERS-, and own a very sucessful business.
================
@ the rest, I'll stop ranting now.
08/12/2005 (6:37 pm)
Quote:@Chris
If I were anti GG I wouldn't have given them my money for TGE, TSE and T2D would I now.
Thats a completely non point / argument I am anti-UBI, but I own Far Cry( and play it several times a week ) , GR, GR2, Splinter Cell... ETC.
I'm refering to statements such as...
Quote: Garage Games. Once the home of Indie gaming... now well not so much!
Kinda insulting when they've done so much for so many people, don't you think?
===============
Quote: The difference between you and me is that I have never been a fan-boy. I don't feel the need to agree with people simply to conform. I'm not afraid to say my opinion and I don't expect anyone at GG to agree with it either.
My post was general info for other developers. GG have already signed an NDA with Microsoft, otherwise they wouldn't have a 360 dev kit! It is suprising how many developers don't know that they can simply approach Microsoft and strike up a relationship with them. Clearly you were not aware of this if you though my remark was aimed at GG.
You're 100% right, I'm nothing but a conformist GG fan boy who had no idea about GG and MS and their relation ship. Nope not a clue. But rember this... You're probably twice my age, and still work for a salary that increases a measly 3-4 % each year, while I'm 20, and have 9 months left on my -MASTERS-, and own a very sucessful business.
================
@ the rest, I'll stop ranting now.
Torque Owner Joe Maruschak
We are far from being dismissive of this reviewer. We ARE listening to what people are saying, and we are paying attention. The point I tried to make (and you obviously glossed over in your soapboxing) is that the opinion of this one reviewer may or may not be representative of the audience as a whole. In terms of the final analysis (whether or not the audience responded to our game) the jury is still out. We just don't have enough data yet to make any assumptions about what did or did not work.
As for the graphics, we have gotten the exact oppostie comments from a ton of others, developers and non developers. When shown on a big screen TV at a show, ThinkTanks tends to attract people (and not to come over and see how sucky it looks).
The reviewer may be representative of a sample of the target audience. This does not necessarily mean he/she represents a wide cross section of the audience, and I would not take it is a foregone conclusion that the reviewr represents a majority of the intended audience.
Take criticism, but to treat it objectively. One bad review does not make a bad game. One passing comment from one reviewer (who appeared to have an axe to grind with XBLA) does not give us any useful data. Having one person say my game sucks does not give me any useful feedback. Having a ton of people saying the same thing does give me useful feedback.
I think it would be unwise to over emphasize the importance of this individuals opinion. I will wait until we get some sales numbers and other feedback so that I can look at it as a whole. As a developer, making development decisions based on one persons opinion is not a wise thing to do. It is unfortunate that the weight of one persons opinion can be blown out of proportion if that persons opinion happens to be public.