Topic: Wiiware is lowering our expectations

@stuffgamer1

I don't believe you understand where the discussion started. Sean said he would score Mario 3 a 6 because HE finds the game difficult, and HE doesn't like the genre, that's where the discussion started. The balance you talk about is lost when scoring a game based on your lack of skill or preference for certain genres. The fact that a review is someone's opinion and there is no such thing as total objectivity, (again) is stating the obvious. I think we can all agree on that.

@retrobuttons: I am well aware of what started this discussion. To Sean's credit, he DID list several more objective points he would include in the review. IMO, the SCORE is 100% opinion, while the review TEXT gives room to talk about what some people might like or the fact that the difficulty made it no fun for the reviewer. I think this discussion has perhaps been too deeply connected to review scores in the first place (as they usually are). People are ignoring and/or misunderstanding what Sean said. I note he hasn't returned to this discussion. I can only assume it's because of how his post, and by extention HE, is being treated in this debate.

Cast in point: the new review for Puzzle to Go Wildlife. The score's pretty bad, right? But the TEXT of the review tells me that the game would be well worth my $5 to download because of my tastes in gaming. Sean would do the same with SMB3.

@stuffgamer1

You are ignoring my point that when a game is reviewed and scored based on lack of skill or prefference for certain genres, the balance you talked about is gone. This discussion is not about Sean or his review skills, all I am saying is that his comments started the discussion.

seems like the "discussion" is kind of an endless loop where everyone just wants the last word. Sounds like we all agree that there isn't really such a thing as complete, literal objectivity, but to a degree we expect a games review to be about the relative merits and features of a game, whether or not it's your kind of thing or how bad you are at it. everything in moderation.

clearly no one is saying a review should ramble on about what other games they love and how they did on this or that level. Does anyone ever really do that? But there is some element of a reviewers opinion that needs to be taken into consideration, especially when looking at a number score. A score alone is not enough info when you're talking about putting your money into buying a game.

Seems to me this would be a counterbalance to the people reviewing/scoring games they're incredibly skilled at and prefer. Balance upheld.

Also, this discussion isn't going anywhere. Reviewers give what reviewers give, they have certain gaming propensities, they choose to explain or not explain them in their text (where they also defend/describe why the game was scored the way it was) and then we choose to accept or reject the review given how we view games. Sean would be well within his rights to give SMB 3 a 6. Hell, give it a 2. Explain why, I'll read it, and I'll disagree. It's up to the gamer to make all the following determinations (does he game the way I do? Does he like the same types of things? Would this bother me the way it does him?)...and I think all of this was covered several pages of posts ago.

@Ren - well-said.

Wait a second this hole sub argument is a catch-22. :

Is it fair to review a game if you cannot even complete 25% of it???

Never seen Water World Giant World Pipe World Ice World Wind World Bowser World?

See?

I think 140+ posts of "opinion" is quite enough. So say we all? Good.