Topic: Game Informer's recent Wii U reviews

Welcome to a place where collective opinions gather. It's called the internet. Are you new here?

A fan of any game can do what you described to a review. Tacking it on a single fanbase just because you see it in a hub of that fanbase? Blame everyone who enjoys games.

If someone gives COD a low score it must be a Nintendo fanboy, but what about someone who doesn't like COD, but likes Halo more? Are they Nintendo fanboys? (COD playable on Nintendo systems, Halo isn't)

Generally speaking, reviews are given by people who have played a lot of video games. At least hundreds. Probably thousands. If someone is to look at COD objectively, it is very hard to justify giving it a low score. It has a ton of content, has pretty much no bugs, has excellent sound design, and is quite fluid in its approach to shooting fools in the face. To many it is a fun game. If someone doesn't like it, it's either because they A) don't like the genre (which is perfectly acceptable; no one has to like everything) or B) is hidebound on their viewpoint on how FPS's should play. The latter doesn't make as much sense, but I can still see the point. I never liked LittleBigPlanet's gameplay mechanics, but others seem to love it. Don't know why, but I won't try to keep people from thinking differently. They're having fun, and that's all that really matters.

So in short, no, they're probably not fanboys.
Also, opinions. I see your point on the fanboy thing. I won't refute it.

I guess you could say they're anti-fanboys. People who can't stand a game's success, so they go out and say it's horrible. In other words, a hater.

Yes I'm new here, please be kind to me, I'm very fragile.

You're not getting my point. I'm not attacking one fanbase but since I'm mainly a Nintendo site ( you're right, NintendoLife), I see it moreso here than anywhere else.

Any fan who wants to insult someone's review or even just deny certain points is ignorant and arrogant. Just because they're publicized opinion doesn't match yours, doesn't give you the right to disrespect it, let alone the reviewer and the site in its entirety. It's called common sense people.

BLOPS 2 got fairly boring rather quickly compared to MW3 on Wii

I agree. However, just singling it on a single fanbase is ignorant as well. If you see it mainly on the site you use mainly, that's not attribute to those fan's in particular. Either way, like you said, it's a shame people do this. (Dunno about denying points though, those can be opinions and therefore argued).

Oh, and welcome.

you must be new to Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft/Apple Life

I don't know why I'd ever bring up Sony fanboys and Microsoft fanboys on a topic about Wii U reviews on a Nintendo oriented website. That sounds irrelevant and pointless.

Yep. Though all you had to do was this:

Does that not show a better understanding of everyone, instead of specifically stating one faction is awful regarding these concepts, implying that other fans react in lesser manner?

Because I don't see who benefits when you eneter a Nintendo Fourm and attack the Nintendo Fans on an industry issue.

Attacking is a strong word. I'd say pointing out the obvious.

Mentioning fans in general doesn't seem to be the best idea since I was directing it to our community, which believe it or not, are mostly Nintendo fans. All fans have ignorant followers who never try new things unless it has their beloved company's logo on the cover. Again you're pointing out obvious things.

The reason I even began to direct it solely on the Nintendo side, was due to the fact this community needs to open its eyes and appreciate other peoples' opinions even if they disagree. Beyond that, you're the only one that took my comment personally.

I also see no industry issue either. I think you're exaggerating small concerns.

Believe it or not, a generalization does not invoke the thought "pointing out the obvious". I am a Nintendo fan, but respect there are reasons for people not liking a game.

I don't understand. Would specifically mentioning Nintendo fans really be a better idea to proving your point on a Nintendo site? The idea seems like it wouldn't cause the "best" effect. Of course, maybe I'm looking at it wrong... could you clarify this point a bit more?

Right. We both pointed out the obvious. However, you said only half of what it applied to, leading me to believe there was a reason for this, as it seems nonsensical to leave everyone out in proving the point you've concluded. Not attempting to instigate anything, I'm simply stating that it seemed odd to me at the time.

Then you should place the same argument everywhere for every community that has members doing the same thing, to state the obvious on all fronts, right? I could help.

Oh, I'm not personally ofended. It just seems like you're hindering your argument, and since it's such a good one, we need it to be as perfect as it can be. I'm merely the onlooker providing responses as a form of constructive criticism.

With the big thread about reviews and 'bias' in the General Discussion I would have thought otherwise, but I'll admit I may be getting a bit too steamed about a 'small concern'.
Like you did, with your initial post.

You sir, are 100% incorrect...at least you don't speak for me on the issue. I wish there was a way to PM people...

The idea seems like it wouldn't cause the "best" effect. Of course, maybe I'm looking at it wrong... could you clarify this point a bit more?

It's like counseling a schizophrenic with strategies learned from previous patients. You don't bring up bipolar disorder when you're dealing with someone who suffers with depression issues. I don't know how you're not getting my line of thinking.

This is a Nintendo site, not GameFaqs. Pointing out Nintendo fans do this, is not irrelevant nor is it harsh or whatever term you or anyone else is bound to use to describe my thoughts on the TC's unnecessary rant about GameInformer's whatever "problem".

Not attempting to instigate anything, I'm simply stating that it seemed odd to me at the time.

If it seems odd, address it more professionally next time.

Then you should place the same argument everywhere for every community that has members doing the same thing, to state the obvious on all fronts, right? I could help.

You're right. I should go to every message board on every site, Nintendo oriented or not, and bring up my heart warming topic. No flawed logic there.

With the big thread about reviews and 'bias' in the General Discussion I would have thought otherwise, but I'll admit I may be getting a bit too steamed about a 'small concern'.
Like you did, with your initial post.

So you were offended? Great to know you take video games so seriously.

At least I wasn't offended, more baffled, if you would say. I've seen this before but it's like Nintendo fans think reviewer's opinion are facts.

[quote]

Most opinions in a game review should be based around facts. If a review starts spouting off incorrect information, that then makes the person's "opinion" misinformed based on incorrect information. You can say the world is flat all day long, but the FACT is different. Just because you have an "opinion" doesn't mean it's a right opinion, based on fact. GameSpot wanted an action game. In other words, they played a game...knowing it wasn't a particular genre, then complained that it wasn't that genre. Do you go to a restaurant and order a salad, then gripe it's not a steak? That's exactly what GameSpot did. If you don't like salad, don't order it. If you don't like survival horror games, don't play them.

This has nothing to do with opinions being right/wrong and debating on those topics, this has to do with "reviews" containing incorrect information, and complaining about things that make absolutely no sense in the game's setting.

Since when did this topic go from Gameinformer to GameSpot? Oh yeah it didn't.

Since...
"Nintendo fans will completely agree with a review if it's high, but if it's low, then it's inaccurate, biased, and above all, a sheer sign of the antichrist."

I stated that was incorrect.

Same can be applied to GameInformer's "review".

Also, you were the one that brought up Nintendo fans disagreeing with low review scores, and not high. I said that isn't true. I didn't agree with a ZombiU "review" that gave it a "high" score. I even contacted the site about a big issue I had with it.

Gameinformer's horror expert reviewer, reviewed ZombiU and obviously disliked it. He knew exactly what he was getting into and explained how it flopped with enough facts to relate to.

You can't deny fans get upset when a game they like receives a bad score. The problem is, is that most fans don't read the review itself which explains why it is what it is.

I've played ZombiU and I agree with most of the lower scored reviews. But really, why are you even bothering? My comment wasn't supposed to be taken personally.

His "review" contained incorrect information. Complained about something, just to complain. Didn't state the game offers a default (see - the one you start with) control option for one of his issues. He failed to say how long it took him to beat it, but said it has "low" replay value? Please explain that laziness to me. He didn't even state how many hours it took him to finish the game in his "review", how many survivors it took him to beat it (giving us an idea of his "expert" horror status).

GameInformer has no/few review standards that matter. The opinion written, again, contains tainted/incorrect information and complaining to complain. See, using your hands to eat a salad, instead of using a fork that is provided...then complaining you used your hands repeatedly, and failing to mention the fork was sitting next to the plate. That is ignorance, or possibly stupidity, at it's finest.

Being an expert on survival horror games doesn't mean he's a completionist. And I have no idea where he even mentions replay value whatsoever. I have the magazine right next to me, if you would be so kind to tell which paragraph it's mentioned that would be oh so great.

How can his opinion be incorrect? He found the game's backtracking unnecessarily frustrating and tedious, the gamepad's use annoying, online co-op tacked on and the melee combat awful. All of which I agree on. The tank controls are even worse, I mean, I know the game is supposed to be difficult, but come on Ubi.

Replay value is ranked on the side of the "review" under "Replay". Again, he complained about one use with the GamePad - moving it to scan - but failed to mention the DEFAULT CONTROLS that allow you to "scan" without moving the GamePad. Complaining he ate a salad with his hands, because he didn't know how to use a fork? Seriously? Some "expert", he didn't even know how to control the game he was playing apparently...but that didn't stop him from complaining.

"Being an expert on survival horror games doesn't mean he's a completionist."
If he didn't finish the game, he shouldn't put a score on it. ZombiU has a start, and a finish. Then again, I guess playing games these days doesn't really matter for reviews...just watch a few trailers, play it for an hour - maybe, and decide if you want to go positive or negative on it, and stick with it.

I see nothing "expert" in his review, just a lot of unprofessional complaining to only complain (he used his hands to eat the salad, instead of the fork - his fault, not the game's fault he only played it for apparently an hour). Failing to mention the alternative, better, DEFAULT control for scanning and not apparently completing the game, which for a "horror" expert is pretty lame IMO, but saying it has "Low" Replay value is horrible and unprofessional.

"online co-op tacked on"
There is no online co-op......different game?

As for "tank" controls, I must be playing a different game. Did you and him perhaps get Tank!Tank!Tank! in your game cases instead of ZombiU? There is a default control to help with "turning" and there is a sprint button as well.