Topic: Star Fox Zero - OT

@Grumblevolcano: I don't hope so, but you're probably going to tell me they did..

@Grumblevolcano: what was the meme this time?

@DarthNocturnal: Use Bombs wisely!!!

@DarthNocturnal: to be fair it's hard to say what is and isn't a meme these days, such is the insanely high amount of phrases that now qualify. The dialogue was always gonna be cheesy, and I'm OK with that. So long as they avoid things like the doge meme that seem a bit forced and out of place then I don't really see it as a criticism.

And let's be honest, did that meme in Triforce Heroes really tarnish the game so much as to merit the 300+ comments the article got on this site? I think not.

If I'm correct, is copies of the game is being sent to reviewers?

Well, obviously. It is very important to oppose memes!

pfft

Can people stop getting mad at things in games unless they at least actually matter in terms of the quality of the game itself?

Anyone see what Polygon did for their "review?" Confirms Arthur Gies is a worthless piece of cheese that has no business in the video game industry. I have no idea how that pitiful excuse for a human being still has a job.

@Kogorn733 - please mind the profanity. Thanks muchly

@Kogorn733: Just looked it up. Sounds like the reviewer went in with a bone to pick from the very beginning and dropped it after playing the game for an hour.

Then again, Polygon is notorious for being a terrible website, so...

Or they are baiting people by writing bad reviews so people will click on them.

To save people a click and to keep others from going to Polygon lol, here is the last paragraph and sentence from their "Review"

EDIT: Dang, I wasn't fast enough to save people

And yet Polygon reviewed Splatoon, a game that was short on content at launch.
I'm just gonna get the game.

Were Polygon the same ones whom couldn't be bothered to do a Codename STEAM review?

Seeing mostly good reviews, nothing below a an 8 or an Excellent type review, from anywhere worthwhile looking at. Except, the usual Forbes, not that it was a review but they for some reason felt the need for the umpteenth time to make an article saying "-game name here- IS THE SWAN SONG FOR THE WIIU, AS NINTENDO GIVES UP ON IT ALL" where pretty much no where else is saying that except a few comments here and there on forums.

Sounds like paranoia to me. Clickbait titles and whatnot are a thing, but I don't see any reason to believe a large website like Polygon is deliberately giving bad reviews to bait people.

If they wanted to do that, they'd do it to something that generally reviews really well and is popular, like a new Mario or Zelda game, not a divisive entry in the Star Fox series.

I don't think that it's right, even for 'professional reviews', that one must complete a game in order to judge it. Let's face it, is there anyone here who has never bad-mouthed a game despite not getting up to the credits screen? I think that the few who don't are very admirable and are in the exception, I mean, it's not like even the best games are completed by most people, Bloodborne and The Witcher 3 have a less than 30% completion ratio based off of the trophies on PSN. If you're not having fun, surely you're just gonna stop and surely you won't have good things to say about said game from there on?

I understand that there is a presumption that people who review games for sites should complete them due to the fact they're paid to play them and they could influence a lot of people in buying the game. But for me, as long as they don't try to hide the fact that they didn't complete the game and are transparent about that then there's not much to complain about. He gave the game a go, hated it and stopped.

The article does seem kinda clickbaity and a bit seems to have a bit too much venom (lol) behind it but ultimately it's one guy's opinion.

I don't know. I think it is kinda intentional. After following Polygon for a little, I got sick and tired how no matter what game was coming out or did come out they had to find something to complain about it. It got tiring.

@TheLastLugia: The game is, like, three hours per playthrough. If the guy couldn't even play the game for three hours, then he clearly had no intention of giving this game a fair shake. It's not like this game is some functionally broken piece of trash like Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing.

@TheLastLugia: I understand not playing the game until the end. I don't need to play a game for longer than a hour to know if I like it. But for a professional review, you should probably play through the majority of the content. Besides that, it is just that website's policy to complete the game before posting a final review on it. I think it is messed up that a "professional" reviewer gave up on that and is able to pass that off as their "review".

But as I say at least he's not trying to pass this off as a review. He's transparent, albeit I can understand why this has aggravated people. As has been pointed out, it is on the shorter side of things, but I'm just not a fan of obliging people to complete games before giving their opinion. Chances are his opinion wouldn't have changed even if he completed it.

It is still under the review category on the website, so it is still being considered the review for the game while not actually being a review. You are right, his opinion probably wouldn't have changed but it is the website's policy that the game be finished to review, him giving up should mean they get someone else to review it. It is a pretty messy situation with this article. He should have finished it before reviewing (as website's policy) but he didn't, but he still wrote a review, but he isn't calling it a review, but the website has it marked as the Star Fox Zero review... Once the reviewer gave up, they should have had someone else review it and that person then could have written an opinion piece.

So many people could have stopped this from being what it is and even if the reviewer doesn't like a game, it doesn't mean they should throw out website policy or not review the game. In fact them being that hard of a negative review should be all the more reason they should actually review it.