Forums

Topic: Petition to have NintendoLife stop reviewing games of abysmal quality

Posts 21 to 40 of 48

gcunit

If there were other games you'd rather the site be reviewing, then there might be a point to this 'petition', but I'm not sure there are right now.

Also, I think it would be unprofessional to point the finger of 'scam' at any product unless there was some deception going on.

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

faint

Every game deserves a review and not everyone is going to like the same things you like. From time to time I try to pick up and old inde game I missed to find Nintendo life is the only one who reviewed it. I won't be picking up this panda title but it would be a great disservice if users start dictating what they can and can't review.

[email protected]
friend code: 0103-9004-2456

DefHalan

spizzamarozzi wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

The more info they can give the better.

the problem is that the info are always published in a non-critical, forgiving manner.
You would expect a professional website to alert the readers when they spot bad practices and people who take advantage of the customers' good faith, but it never happens.
They rate the product, full stop. The overall vibe is always "better luck next time" rather than "this is dishonest", "this is shady", "this is hurting the business". And this believe it or not hurts both the audience and honest developers.

They are reviewing a product, not a developer. They should focus on the game, without the developer affecting their reviews. Just because lots of people don't like the developer doesn't mean reviews should attack the developer for the product they release. NintendoLife should and does just review the product. Their scoring system is different than some other websites and reviews after just one person's opinion.

If a writer for NL wanted to write an article calling out a Developer's bad practices, then that would be a different type of article than a review. Maybe a writer could write something explaining the benefits and drawbacks of a developer's practices and site some reviews for their evidence, but the reviews should be about the product they are reviewing.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

roy130390

@gcunit Gotta protectors! Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the OP, specially because having more information at our reach is never a bad thing, and that deciding which game is worth a review before giving it a fair chance makes no sense. Who decides what games are "worth" a review and based on what? His personal taste? However, I mention that game because I think reviewers are forgetting about it... A lot .

roy130390

spizzamarozzi

Is there a scientific or social reason why the europeans think this is a valuable point while the americans, as usual, don't give a poop about anything and try to convince you that the problem is you?!?

Edited on by Undead_terror

Top-10 games I played in 2017: The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild (WiiU) - Rogue Legacy (PS3) - Fallout 3 (PS3) - Red Dead Redemption (PS3) - Guns of Boom (MP) - Sky Force Reloaded (MP) - ...

3DS Friend Code: 0104-0649-7464 | Nintendo Network ID: spizzamarozzi

DefHalan

spizzamarozzi wrote:

Is there a scientific or social reason why the europeans think this is a valuable point while the americans, as usual, don't give a f*** about anything and try to convince you that the problem is you?!?

Well seeing as there are Europeans that don't agree with you and Americans that aren't attacking you in this very thread, I would say this is a incorrect statement.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

DarthNocturnal

spizzamarozzi wrote:

Is there a scientific or social reason why the europeans think this is a valuable point while the americans, as usual, don't give a f*** about anything and try to convince you that the problem is you?!?

You forgot about Canadians who will point out that you just torpedo'd your argument by making stupid comments like this.

Starting what sounds like a witch hunt over some lower quality / small budget games made by a dev who may just need some constructive criticism is a bad idea.

"Sometimes, I just don't understand human behavior" - C-3P0

roy130390

"Is there a scientific or social reason why the europeans think this is a valuable point while the americans, as usual, don't give a poop about anything and try to convince you that the problem is you?!?"

@spizzamarozzi Precisely because of this kind of arguments it's clear thay you are the one with a problem. If you really think that all the people in a continent think alike just because they share it then you are really naive. Besides, this doesn't help your argument at all and it isn't relevant in any way, it just shows how judgmental you are. Judge each person separately dude, not based on things like this. It's a really dumb assumption.

"The game in question, reports the reviewer, is poor in quality, 5 to 10 minutes long and costs £1.39/€1.99/$1.99.
And yet it scored a 4 (FOUR), a super score considering the actual quality."

You can have fun with a game despite being really short. Besides, it's the reviewers opinion. Just because he gave it a better score than you would, it doesn't mean that the reviewer is wrong. Different tastes, different standards, different points of view, different OPINIONS.

"You would expect a respectable website to punish, or ridicule, or at least call out a game and a developer for trying so blatantly to con his audience into buying products of extremely low quality just to make a dollar. Unfortunately this never happens. And this is bad for a variety of reasons."

No, I don't. You are assuming again what everyone expects. The only thing I would expect for a respectable site is to give a fair and honest review. Why would I want them to attack a developer? It's precisely because they keep strictly professional and try not to involve personal feelings that I trust their reviews.

"First, it creates a lot of confusion and unfairness in the overall scores. One month ago, the lovely 3Souls - a game in the works for many months that goes above and beyond what's available on the eShop when it comes to original GamePad applications - was given a 5 for "trying to hard to implement the GamePad". A couple of weeks ago, the highly polished game Poncho was given a 6 for being "too hard". Countless games have been awarded average scores for being "too this" and "too that". This is absolutely fine, but not when games like Panda Love get awarded a similar score for being, quite frankly, "nothing"."

Yes, people get confused, sometimes with even the most simple things in life. As soon as you understand that each reviewer thinks different and that a review is based on a perspective as objective as it tries to be since they are humans, you'll see that they don't have to affect you so much. Yes, the customer could judge wrong a game based on the review, just as he could do the same if he hears a friend's opinion or watches footage of the game. I suppose that you have played Panda's love and that you have a reason to be so sure about those games being way better than that one, but keep in mind that the reviewer could feel way different about those games. It is definitely valid to criticize a review, but to ask for some games to stop being reviewed based on their quality, which by the way can only be known if played and reviewed doesn't make sense.

"When a game that offers a lot and takes months (if not years) to make get awarded a similar score of a game that offers 5 minutes of playtime and was made in one Sunday afternoon by someone who is clearly in the business just to take advantage of people's wealth and bad taste, you really ask yourself "why are we on this planet?""

Assumptions again. Maybe the creator(s) behind Panda's Love aren't as talented as the other ones, but worked really hard to make that game. Even if what you said is true, there's a big difference in prices between those games, so that could give Panda's Love a huge advantage from the reviewer's point of view. You consider anyone that likes a game that you don't someone with a bad taste, so are you suggesting that this site should base scores and the games they choose to review based on your taste? Because if not, you'll keep disagreeing with them.

"Second, reviewing these abysmal games means that no matter how low the quality, a bad product is always guaranteed coverage on one of the main Nintendo based websites around. And the coverage will simply state if a game is bad or good, raising awareness in a non-critical manner. No developer has ever been called out for shady business. Nobody had their professionality questioned even when it's clear some of them are only after your money and DON'T CARE about the products they deliver. How many times have you read a reviewer simply state "Don't give your money to them. It's a scam."?! I have never."

Well, calling out someone for shady business needs proof. Doing mediocre games isn't shady business, just a bad habit. Indeed, I have never seen a reviewer say something like that, and that's great because it's an accusation. If I were them I wouldn't like my product to be called scam just because despite my hard work it turned mediocre at best. It shouldn't be called a scam to begin with, because they aren't doing anything to give the game such a reputation. Even if they put little effort on them, they aren't cheating people with a false trailer or promising features that aren't included, you know, things that actually count as scam.

Besides, you never know. This site could stop reviewing games from a certain developer, and just when they decide to do that, those guys make a really good game that actually deserved attention and they won't get it just because they didn't reach that potential with their past games. I can trust on this site to review games that are normally ignored by many, so why would they lose a feature that makes them distinctive from others and a good alternative when that kind of stuff happens? You are asking way too much just based on how you feel and that is quite unfair.

Edited on by roy130390

roy130390

gcunit

@Chandlero Should we? Because I disagree. Prices aren't fixed and often become irrelevant over time.

IMO price shouldn't really come into a game's score at all. It's certainly worth commenting on the value-for-money at launch, but it's difficult to do so concisely because the price can vary so much with certain titles across retailers. And 12 months later a game is still being judged on Metacritic etc. by a score that was set around launch, but the game can often be had for 50% less than the original price.

Reviews should include some game longevity analysis, but most tend to, so I don't see a problem.

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

Maxz

I wish there were more games getting higher scores - but that's just the current games drought, and not really NL's problem. I don't think the solution is to suddenly stop reviewing games that aren't.

And how would you conclude that a game wasn't 'worth reviewing' unless you'd spent some time playing it, developing an opinion, and therefore doing a fair bit of the effort that goes into producing a review? Should NL just hold back any reviews that are destined to score 3 or less for the sake of it?

Also, knowing a game is bad is just as important as knowing one is good. People who are interested still have something to gain by sticking the game's name into Google and finding out that actually, it might not be worth their money or time. The alternative is that no reviews exist and they might take a chance on it, wasting both.

I find this EUR/USA split assertion a bit irrelevant, too. The majority of people don't seem to agree. Trying to divide them into two camps and then make the case that there's a strange factor influencing one of those camps' opinions is an unhelpful distraction and doesn't address the responses directly.

I think some people have been a bit heavy handed and personal in labelling the an 'obsession' of yours, but I can't say I find the case entirely convincing.

Reviewers should review what's on the market. If it's mainly bad, then it's mainly bad.

The main thing I hope is that the market itself changes before too long and we some some better games - and correspondingly better reviews.

Edited on by Maxz

My Mario Maker Bookmark Page
Spla2oon Ranks: SZ: X | TC: X | RM: X | CB: X
HAVE BEEN ENJOY A BOOM

Switch Friend Code: SW-5609-8195-9688 | Nintendo Network ID: Maxzly | Twitter:

Ultimategamer132

Water feels a little salty, but life isn't without risks jumps in

As a reviewer, I do feel that sugarcoating how bad something may be is simply dumb. However, no matter how bad a game is (cough cough Alphadia cough cough) it is a reviewer's job to find even the smallest amount of good an awful game could have and vice versa. That is how a reviewer and his/her reviews should work. Things like prices can be used as reference points, but they shouldn't be used as the entire argument for why a game may be good or bad.

I dumped review scores a long time ago as I found that reviews should be based on the specifics of a game. This makes it easier for people to find out whether or not they like a game without using a freaking number as their deciding factor... A NUMBER!!!

In conclusion, reviews should give information on a game while also having the opinion of its reviewer so people can use the information of a game and the reviewer's opinion to make a decision on the game for themselves. The most important thing, however, is how I hope it isn't too late in the argument where people pay attention to what I just wrote and make me feel that my effort to write this isn't wasted.

Twitter:
@ultimate_gmr132

Instagram:
@the_ultimatum_blog

3DS Friend Code: 5370-0957-8341 | Nintendo Network ID: Ultimategamer132

isaiahhoyt

Well of course games like super smash bros u and xenoblade yep all terrible now masterpieces like sonic boom animal crossing amiibo festiv should always be reviewed all deserve 11 out of 10 but nintendo life just can't reconize masterpieces when they see one

isaiahhoyt

spizzamarozzi

roy130390 wrote:

Precisely because of this kind of arguments it's clear thay you are the one with a problem. If you really think that all the people in a continent think alike just because they share it then you are really naive. Besides, this doesn't help your argument at all and it isn't relevant in any way, it just shows how judgmental you are. Judge each person separately dude, not based on things like this. It's a really dumb assumption.

I was stating a simple fact. Don't put words into my mouth: I'm not saying "people in a continent think alike because they share it" - it's immensely stupid to think that. I don't think I have to explain that, but everytime somebody points out anything about the current state of affairs, there's always a good chunck of people who are totally defensive of the status quo and a few people who like to challenge it. If I say that there's a difference in how strongly potentially problematic things are perceived.
I see americans tend to care less, and it's not racist or classist or whatever to say. You are free to think otherwise, I don't care.

Of course I have tried to be constructive (I always do) but when I am replied that "there is no problem" or that I should "take a step back and do other things" or that "I am the problem", I mean at that point I don't care anymore how my point comes across since it's clear people don't care and they just want to be defensive.

roy130390 wrote:

You can have fun with a game despite being really short. Besides, it's the reviewers opinion. Just because he gave it a better score than you would, it doesn't mean that the reviewer is wrong. Different tastes, different standards, different points of view, different OPINIONS.

I don't understand this. You are very defensive of other people's opinion. But I have expressed my opinion on the matter. You want me to take other people's opinion as right, but you take my opinion as wrong. There's something really unbalanced in this process.

roy130390 wrote:

No, I don't. You are assuming again what everyone expects. The only thing I would expect for a respectable site is to give a fair and honest review. Why would I want them to attack a developer? It's precisely because they keep strictly professional and try not to involve personal feelings that I trust their reviews.

But this is your fault for not expecting journalism to fulfill its primary purpose.
Journalists should call out people and companies for bad practices. For example, they should call out Nintendo for keeping the prices of their products artificially high (Nintendo was already fined €168 millions in 2002, but it never gets mentioned on gaming websites). Or they should call out developers who pump out abysmal stuff just to take advantage of people's wealth and naiveness. Calling out something is very different from attacking, I hope you know. You seem to expect jounalism to be simply about stating a polite opinion on something. But opinion, being opinions, are inherently worthless: what's "frustratingly difficult" for you, may not be as difficult for me. So what would be the point?!
I repeat, if you expect journalism to be just about describing a product, you are absolutely wrong.

roy130390 wrote:

Yes, people get confused, sometimes with even the most simple things in life. As soon as you understand that each reviewer thinks different and that a review is based on a perspective as objective as it tries to be since they are humans, you'll see that they don't have to affect you so much. Yes, the customer could judge wrong a game based on the review, just as he could do the same if he hears a friend's opinion or watches footage of the game. I suppose that you have played Panda's love and that you have a reason to be so sure about those games being way better than that one, but keep in mind that the reviewer could feel way different about those games. It is definitely valid to criticize a review, but to ask for some games to stop being reviewed based on their quality, which by the way can only be known if played and reviewed doesn't make sense.

The point is still the same: you expect journalism to be just about a description of something. You're ok with reviewers telling you that "the environments are detailed" and "the platforming feels spot on" or that "the save points are too far apart" but this is not critique is it?! This is simply somebody stating an opinion you can't even trust because it's too subjective.
If the press doesn't point out the bad practices, who will?!

roy130390 wrote:

are you suggesting that this site should base scores and the games they choose to review based on your taste?

No. I've never said that.
But if a review has to be a non-critical text that only states about the graphics or the controls without addressing other more important issues because it's impolite, or because it's supposedly unprofessional (not true, it's highly professional), I don't see the use in that.

roy130390 wrote:

Well, calling out someone for shady business needs proof. Doing mediocre games isn't shady business, just a bad habit. Indeed, I have never seen a reviewer say something like that, and that's great because it's an accusation. If I were them I wouldn't like my product to be called scam just because despite my hard work it turned mediocre at best. It shouldn't be called a scam to begin with, because they aren't doing anything to give the game such a reputation. Even if they put little effort on them, they aren't cheating people with a false trailer or promising features that aren't included, you know, things that actually count as scam.

I get it, you want reviewers to be sterile, useless products descriptors.
Big deal.
In 30 years videogame reviews will be written by cows. And you'll be ok with it.

roy130390 wrote:

Besides, you never know. This site could stop reviewing games from a certain developer, and just when they decide to do that, those guys make a really good game that actually deserved attention and they won't get it just because they didn't reach that potential with their past games. I can trust on this site to review games that are normally ignored by many, so why would they lose a feature that makes them distinctive from others and a good alternative when that kind of stuff happens? You are asking way too much just based on how you feel and that is quite unfair.

Of all things, this is probably the most stupid. They should keep covering everything just in case something good happens.Anybody with an IQ above the chipmunk level can play a game for half an hour and decide if it's worth coverage or not. You won't miss the next Miyamoto, don't worry.

Top-10 games I played in 2017: The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild (WiiU) - Rogue Legacy (PS3) - Fallout 3 (PS3) - Red Dead Redemption (PS3) - Guns of Boom (MP) - Sky Force Reloaded (MP) - ...

3DS Friend Code: 0104-0649-7464 | Nintendo Network ID: spizzamarozzi

faint

@spizzamarozzi what I want to know is who gets to decide what they do or don't review? Are we looking to censor them? If you are starting a petition to keep them from doing what they want (review all games) then wouldn't the success of that petition be their censorship? You could always go to ign. They don't review the small games.

[email protected]
friend code: 0103-9004-2456

HandheldGuru97

Personally, when I first came to find Nintendo Life (circa 2009) I was looking for one thing, DSiWare reviews. Crazy, but I loved the DSi Shop at the time, yet no reviewed the games for the service, so I used the unreliable source of Wikipedia to see what was coming up on the shop. Back then, I didn't have an IPhone or an IPod or even a PSP, so having a digital store in my hands was mind blowing! I found Nintendo Life through Asphalt 4: Elite Racing and it was love at first sight. Through out 2009-2011 my main source for DSi reviews came from Nintendo Life and...Nintendo Power. Nintendo Life added a bit more detail to what NP offered at the time. I found countless gems and hidden titles that under this "petition" you'd like Nintendo Life to stop reviewing? Reviews are about two things: One, weeding out the bad from the good (based on the opinion of the reviewer) and Two, finding the gems. Reviews help find hidden gems, that without just one review (at least for me) I'd never have found. There are many hidden gems across platforms (not just the DSi or 3DS), but Gameboy, Dreamcast, PSP, PS Vita, Atari Lynx, Sega Genesis, Sega Game Gear, and countless more that I have in my collection thanks to one or two reviewers. So instead of adding my name to the petition I'll send a huge shout out to @ThomasBW84 and the rest of NL team for their dedication on reviewing every digital Nintendo game...no small task, but one I am grateful they chose to undertake.

Edited on by HandheldGuru97

Formally Square-enixFan, Neo-GeoFan. A lover of fine games and handheld systems!!!!!!!!!!
The New 3DS XL is amazing, soon the NX will be upon us!
Backloggery
Check my Youtube channel out!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Ha...

3DS Friend Code: 1289-8230-2854 | Nintendo Network ID: Square_Enix_Fan

Top

Sorry, this topic has been locked.