Devil's Third has been the subject of much heated debate over the past few weeks with Nintendo of America's publishing status supposedly flip-flopping like a grounded Cheep-Cheep - and that's without even going into the recent previews that give a less-than favourable view of the game.
Unfortunately as critics it's our job to pick apart games, and considering we're usually treated to truly exceptional quality and fun from games with the Nintendo branding, it's no surprise that a game like Devil's Third has received some backlash.
We stand by the views in our preview, but that doesn't mean that the whole game is a train-wreck. We spent some more time with the game and discovered some areas where things look a lot more positive on certain fronts. You can find out what we thought in the videos below, and just to show that this is a balanced look at the game we've also included the bad stuff as well; would be folly to suggest that the game isn't without its faults.
Do you feel that Devil's Third has had too much negative coverage, or do you think all the slamming is justified? Let us know in the comments section below.
There is no two ways about this: I like it. I really do! I will most certainly buy it, it scratches an itch I hardly ever get to scratch on Wii U since "Bayonetta 2" came out. Truly hope the vast amount of player customization and weaponry keeps me hooked to the online part of the game long after I am done with the single player anti-SOD campaign.
The Bad things don't sound so bad
Since I haven't played Devil's Third myself, I have no idea whether the negative feedback was justified or not. That said, I don't plan on getting it, either, so I might never even find out.
Hey, look everyone! More damage control.
I can stand by this kind, though, even if I hate the way Alex talks.
I can live with poor textures on background characters and the occasional fps drop, but if the frame rates are stopping me from having a pleasant experience it will stop me from getting this game.
It certainly deserves the slamming imo and still would have several years ago too, maybe not to the extent that it is with multiple articles and videos about how bad it is.
Most other bad games usually just fade away or release and sell crap and are never heard of again, but its not often that nintendo publishes a terrible game so i suppose its newsworthy
Curiously, i was not interested in this game...but seing how much people are having difficult to appreciate it made me realize how fun it actually is, the kind of fun that "gamers" have forgotten how it feels
Alright Alex, I didn't want to do this, but you insisted. You sir are a doodoo head. Sorry for the harsh language.
This definitely seems like damage control over the previous article where NL rips this game.
The entomology of sod comes from sodomy/sodomiser, you ignoramus.
Maybe this wouldn't be slammed as much if bayonetta 2 and COD hadn't shown the heights of melee combat and shooting on the console. This looks bland in comparison.
I really didn't see anything bad in the "bad video". All the footage looked the same as it did in the "good video". I'm getting this game regardless of reviewer scores. I remember when NintendoLife gave Watch_Dogs a 6/10, and I definitely disagreed with that. I'll most likely disagree with their score on this game too.
Come August, I'll be going to the beach with Ivan.
I think the game looks great.
I cancelled my pre-order based on the initial NL preview.
Im now tempted to re-order it again purely as this was one of the few mature titles I wanted. I have Bayonetta 1 & 2 and I did buy COD but felt let down by lack of support by Activision.
@Alex_Olney Could the issues highlighted by your team in this game be pacthed?
I have read the other articles about the game designers comments about how his game has been perceived, has the NL team asked him this question about patching / update post release??
No one will know how they like the game until they actually play it and decide for themselves, but I will admit that the 5 bad things sound like game killers for me and the 5 good things don't sell the game to me either.
This game doesn't stand a chance when it's released due to articles like this.It might well be that the online mode that's not been tried yet is the strongest part of the game but I guess we'll never find out as there will be hardly anyone online to play it with.
For everyone saying they should fix the game with an update after its release, games should be done when they come out, not barely functional. Plus remember what happened when Microsoft released Halo like this on Xbox One? It literally took them almost a year to make the game playable.
@dkxcalibur Took the words out of my mouth. What really kills it for me is the controls which sound hard to get used to, then there's frame rate (I prefer my games to run as smoothly as possible, thank you.), and the good things are really just little touches. I'll admit, the one about the idle animations is something I like, but with the controls and frame rate...UGH! However, this does look like something that could, at the very least, be a guilty pleasure, and we haven't seen the online yet, so...let's just wait for the reviews...though I'm not that hopeful right now.
As professional journalists and not professional game designers I would probably move away from being critics and work towards reporting. Spending time defending Unseen64's reporting while questioning the ability of Nintendolife to present a review well enough the first time around makes me wonder what the point of this site is. With a reasonably loyal community I think Nintendolife is a good site, but I would hope that someone representing Nintendolife would want this site to be more than an RSS feed. Maybe recruit someone that studied Game Theory and do articles about how games we play are just giant equations or something to give the site a little more Ethos when making any claims.
Yeahhh, I'm not really interested in the single player. Like CoD, 90% of my time with the game will be online.
@Shiryu Well, if Shiryu likes it .. . I like it lol. .
My question is why are so any people defending a game that on other systems would at best get a 6 out of 10. Are Nintendo fans so desparte for any mature games they will defend it to their death if it even looks remotly interesting.
Get the game if you want but don't be upset if you think reviews and sites are purposely giving the game a bad rep.
@darth2d2 I think the rumor/talking point/editorial articles seep into the main news type articles once in a while. That, and multiple voices confuse who's representing what.
Overall it doesn't look that bad to me, but I don't think it's worth the full retail price. I'll be getting it on a sale or second-hand a while from now.
@Kneesofgomorrah What does any of this have to do with insects, you ignoramus?
@cfgk24 Shiryu eagerly awaits for online component reviews once the Japanese versions hits August 4th and hands on with the controls to see if they do make or break the game.
As long as it's as fun as Street Fighter 2 3d. 😊
"The frame rate has the consistency of David Bowie's haircut."
Okay, I actually know who David Bowie is and I couldn't help but laugh my arse off at that. It's funny AND true. Hadn't laughed that hard since before Iwata-san's passing...
Anyway, I didn't expect an engrossing narrative from Itagaki-san's games. I'm going in expecting Ninja Gaiden levels of vapidness and the same share of T&A.
Controls I can get used to. That's just what gamers do, and as far as visuals go...could be better, but considering the diminishing quality of games coming to PS4 and XBO and how they're beating a majority of software sales on the Wii U, maybe it's time to just get a few unpolished games out into the market and patch them later - much as it pained me to say it.
Bottom line? Let's just hope the brutality, machismo and admittedly revolutionary multiplayer sells more Wii Us. Looks more promising that AC Syndicate and Black Ops III, at least.
@Vineleaf lmfao! Autocorrect! That's another word I'll have to add to my phone's dictionary then...
@Kneesofgomorrah I figured you knew that. I just couldn't resist.
@Vineleaf Made my day lol
@Kneesofgomorrah Sodomiser is a French verb, I think you're looking for sodomite (so to speak).
@Sakura lol! Alright! I take it all back! I'll return in 2 years after extending my education!
Looks good to me
If it sells terrible a patch may never come.
I find it sad that a shortage of new games leaves us desperately trying to justify something that is clearly underwhelming to say the least. And Nintendo Life, I know there was some backlash to your previous article on this game, but at least stand by your opinion.
At this point I'm inclined to believe Nintendo Life has already written their review panning Devil's Third just to support Unseen64. How about we just wait for the game to come out?
This has gotten out of control on both sides. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I personally have a lot of faith in this website, its staff and their reviews. Do I agree with everything said about this game? No. Watching the video shows me it doesn't look as bad as a PS2 game and the framerate can be jumpy but doesn't make the game unplayable. Does it look pretty? Oh no. Fun? Yes. To me. The creator's comments were insulting and reviewers are retaliating. Its a bit of a back and forth. I commend the site for going back and offering more insight and opinion.
I don't know whether people are in denial or sincerely excited. I think the game looked horrible before and looks like garbage now. Many sites share the opinion of NintendoLife and I seriously believe them. Maybe that one article was unnecessary but still. Metacritic 40 incoming.
@Spoony_Tech first, it's kinda hard to know this when they walk back their criticism mere days after they leveled their initial critique.
Secondly, this isn't a review, and you, personally, know nothing about the game other than what the feeding frenzy is saying, so how does it "seem" like a game that would get a 6 on other platforms if NL can't even make up its own mind mere days apart??
The fact is, they got in on the herd-like bashfest*, and now, having realized that maybe they went a bit overboard, are trying to close the barn doors to salvage some credibility.
(The mere fact they feel inclined to do this strongly implies that they were, in fact, going overboard on the first pass, realized it later, and are now trying to paper it over.)
*Such things have been going on since the dawn of gaming journalism--I know, I was a (print) gaming journo for years and watched the herd stampede to and fro based on what 'everyone knew' at any given moment.
Probably would have received a 90 on the PS4/One. Just because it is on a Nintendo console people felt the need to bash it.
What about multiplayer isnt the biggest part of it?
Ultimately it is just a game. If it looks like you will enjoy it, buy it. If not, skip it. Life goes on either way. I am not sure if this is something I am interested in or not, but the reviews are not going to sway me either way unless it is an unplayable mess on release.
Really let down by the recent reviews of Devils Third. Not disappointed in the game, but in the journalists covering it in NL. I think there is a clear negative bias against it, and the "good things" seemed like a cheap attempt to "play nice". Personally, I think this game will still be popular, as much of the development team has faced negative reviews in the past and have been quite successful. When reviews like this come up about Nintendo games before they're even released (Codename S.T.E.A.M was another underrated, fantastic title), it gives no chance for success in future third party titles for Nintendo, only helping kill the current system. Splatoon faced a ton of criticism too, yet it proved everyone wrong. If we, as a Nintendo family cannot come together to support Nintendo (especially since the late Iwata passing), then we are doing nothing but making it harder for the company. I get this game hasn't impressed many people yet, but can we at least wait until it comes out before we kill the hype? This is EXACTLY why the WiiU doesn't have more third party support. Very disappointed in NL...
So having watched both videos now, I feel even more confused than ever.....Nintendolife, you have completely lost my trust on the handling of this. I won't say anyone is wrong, it's all opinions, but the childish reactions and contradictory opinions have meant that I'll form my opinions of this particular game away from this site. I love your coverage of all my favourite Nintendo news and ALWAYS go straight to your reviews as I trust you. For me to continue this I need to put this game to one side and ignore it. To be clear, it's not the game I'm referring to here it's the handling of it which I can't abide, sorry guys.
It's been really interesting following the comments around Devil's Third this past week or so. It seems that everyone has a slightly different view on what they want from the game and what would be acceptable for them as a purchase. It's clear the game has flaws, which has been unanimously reported by publications. I've seen plenty of bad films that I've still enjoyed, doesn't mean that can't be the case for video games.
Ultimately we'll have to wait and see what people make of it for their final reviews and then users themselves. However, people who think there is some bias or alternative agenda on our part are clearly reading too much between the lines. Like most, we really hoped this would be a great game!
@CinisterD agreed, great post!
@ECMIM I'm not sure we can be accused of jumping on the bashfest when all previews were written by various sites under embargo to go live at the same time.
As for the 'good' vs 'bad' videos, I think Alex actually wanted to highlight that there are still some fun elements to the game - whether they are intended or not. As this article states, Tom's preview stands as is.
@antdickens big respect for commenting here man, would be easy to avoid the stress.
In a sense, there is a big compliment to the site that we REALLY DO respect the opinions of this site. This just means on the negative, if people believe it let them down in some way, there is a bigger deal than maybe you deserve created in the aftermath.....
Well, I'm GameFly-ing the game anyway, so it's no sweat off my back. Should be a fun-ish ride while it lasts and I'll move on.
It looks like you're really reaching to find anything "good" about this game. Nice try though.
Didn't Alex state that a 5 good things video was coming in the 5 bad things video, which was uploaded BEFORE the creator posted his comments on Twitter?
Thanks for this but I'm dying to hear about the multiplayer.
@ULTRA-64 no problem, I don't think my opinion is worth any more than anyone else
I think most of the heat in the whole thing is that everyone wanted this to be a good game, the Wii U deserved it. Now it's here and it's not up to scratch there's an element of shoot the messenger, ultimately the reviews will speak for themselves and I can't see it scoring well based on the previews.
I think some people also seem a bit confused as to it being a 'Nintendo game' - it's only Nintendo published so the fact it's not as polished as a typical Nintendo developed game shouldn't really come as a huge surprise.
I'm in the camp that it'll still be fun to play, if you can get it for a fair (not full retail) price.
@DarthNocturnal yep, the videos were planned a little while ago, before the developer comments anyway.
@Junkface there will be another preview focusing on that ahead of the final review next month.
Funny how graphics are in bot hgood and bad - but its true, some of the animated cut scenes look good while play time is bad. I'm not a fan of bad framerate - it kind of ruins the experience for me. It's not a game breaker but funny that Alex references Banjo Tooie - that really frustrated me.
Otherwise I still think I'll pick it up once it goes down a bit i.e. $30-$40
See you guys online !!!
@ECMIM You do know that multiple people on the same staff can have differing opinions without it being some weird conspiracy theory against a game and " trying to close the barn doors to salvage some credibility," right? Note that this comes from Alex, and it focuses on good AND bad, and the preview and snarky comments in response to the developer complaining that problems media outlets had were by Thomas Whitehead. Different people, different opinions (though what they see as bad feels relatively similar).
Also, on a more general note, how did the Devil's Third previews suddenly become what lately feels like the GamerGate of this site? I feel like we're inches away from hearing about how this is all about "ethics in games previewing." Someone who played a game said they didn't like it, and somehow, this has prompted a host of people who haven't even touched it to leap to defend it with absolutely no basis for doing so. I mean, you can feel free to disagree with these opinions when the game comes out, but if you've trusted the opinions of the site before, then why suddenly start questioning them now? And if you didn't take them seriously before, why are you here, and why do you care?
There is no conspiracy theory here, people. Some of the staff didn't like the game, and they base those opinions on what we don't have: actual experience playing the game. That's it. I do think Thomas may have been a bit more snarky than he needed to, but Itagaki seems to be in some kind of delusional state of denial to be unwilling to accept the issues with his game (and technical issues like framerate are not a matter of debate), and if not, needs to properly convey that he's joking.
Again, in short, it boggles my mind the staunch defense people are bringing to a game they've never played, going as far as to invent conspiracy theories. I can only assume it's a bunch of kids that can't accept that a third-party, mature, Wii U exclusive (all phrases that on their own are enough to bring about ardent defenses from Nintendo fans for reasons I'll never understand even if a game is trash) might not be very good. Enjoy it if you plan to, remain apathetic to it if you want to (I know I will), but let's not pretend that Devil's Third is where suddenly a war needs to be fought between the readers and Nintendolife. That's somewhere between hilarious and insane.
@darth2d2 I'll have whatever you're smokin' mate! A bad game is a bad game, if journalists didn't critique we would be buying all sorts of crap for crazy amounts of money! If this came out on PS4 or X1 it would be slammed into the ground - at least on Wii U people are searching for positives among the trashy game design.
@Spoony_Tech I'm with you on that one, but make that a 2 out of 10 on other systems. Nintendo gamers on this site have gone from hammering every half decent 3rd party release that came out in the first year of the system (FIFA, Mass Effect, COD, AC etc) to defending the hell out of this crap. I just don't get it...It must be because it is an exclusive or because the big 3rd party games have dried up.
Call me crazy, but this looks like tons of fun to me. Itagaki's games are challenging to say the least and definitely not for everyone. I happen to love (most of) the modern Ninja Gaiden games, so I think this game will be alright and worth the purchase.
@shigulicious I doubt it; the 5 bad things video has been up for days and mentions the 5 good things follow up.
@MarioPhD You're fast becoming my favourite person.
I know that @antdickens has already done an excellent job of stating our position on this, but here goes.
As you're all aware, final code is now in the hands of sites like ours, and we've been playing the game for a while now - hence Tom's preview, Alex's videos and my own initial impressions, which I've shared in some of the content I've posted on Nintendo Life.
The post yesterday which highlighted Itagaki-san's comments seems to have a ruffled a few feathers. The way I saw it, Itagaki was calling out all of the sites which had dared give the game a negative preview - and that was quite a few, I might add - by insinuating that they didn't have the required skill to play it. He's entitled to defend his game, of course - but to claim that the negative reaction was purely down to journalists not being very good at video games was a bit much, in my opinion. I don't consider myself to be a video gaming champ, but I've been doing this for long enough to know a bad game when I see one.
It's abundantly clear to anyone who actually sits and plays Devil's Third for more than five minutes that the game is a mess. It's a fun mess at times - don't get me wrong - but a mess all the same.
I won't outline exactly why as Tom has done an excellent job of that (go read his preview if you haven't done so already) but there are times when this game doesn't even feel like it's finished. The frame rate dips into single-figures with alarming regularity, the explosions (of which there are many) look terrible and texture and model pop-in is rife, even during cut-scenes. Character models are basic (Ivan and the bosses being the only real exceptions here) and locations lack detail. If this were rendered in 480p, it would pass for a Wii game.
This isn't some vendetta that Nintendo Life has against Devil's Third - as Ant says, we all wanted this game to be amazing and I myself was super-pumped for it. I actually voiced my concern to Nintendo about the game being absent from E3 and the London-based E3 event shortly afterwards, such was my desire to actually get my hands on it. I love Itagaki's previous work and wanted to like this so much. The fact that I don't is based on the quality of the game, not because of some fictional problem people seem to think Nintendo Life has with the game or its developer.
You may be disappointed that we've jumped on some equally fictional "Devil's Third bashing bandwagon", but the fact remains that we - along with several other sites - have played Devil's Third and found it badly wanting. It really is as simple as that.
That's not to say that you won't buy it and enjoy it - opinions are just opinions, after all. But hopefully you will feel that we've been on the money enough times in the past for you to trust the review when it eventually goes live.
soo... bad = framerate, textures, models, overall design, controls.... pretty much everything important. good = dude lights a smoke if you idle for a few seconds, and Sod is apparently hilarious if you happen to be British.
yeah, i'll still be passing on this pile...
@antdickens Thanks alot. I'm super excited for this game. No matter what I'm getting this game to try it for myself. Hope everyone else does too.
@Damo Most bad games only need one article saying why it was bad. "What made Devil's Third so special?" is the real question on everyone's mind.
@dariusq Devil's Third is a Wii U exclusive at a time when the console is crying out for games. That means we're naturally going to cover it quite a bit - especially after Nintendo has been so quiet about it.
@shigulicious Alex did precisely the same thing 4 months ago when they announced that Nintendo was making mobile games: Why Nintendo Games on iOS and Android is a GOOD Thing: https://youtu.be/SQ_em6734BI and also: Why Nintendo Games on iOS and Android is a BAD Thing : https://youtu.be/vFgdEiZtLVI, showing this exact same structure, one day apart, only one day less than these videos on Devil's Third. Hard to call it anything but completely precedented and perfectly reasonable based on the past and something controversial happening in the world of Nintendo, and in this case, it's a game with a weird publishing situation that's been through a tough development period.
@Damo I can't help but feel like you missed the point of what @dariusq was saying, along with several other elements of these comments....
@antdickens Thank you for addressing the comments properly and professionally. Definitely just saved a fan from going elsewhere for their reviews.
@CinisterD Care to elaborate? I'm all ears.
Alex loving your reviews champ! Keep up the Awesome work!
We practically don't even need a review, these previews and reaction pieces have been so extensive and concentrated that they likely cover everything that is going to be said.
Maybe this is just a product of the internet environment, but back in the print days, previews almost never gave away the full scoop on a publication's grading/reviewing results and the full breadth of staff opinions, by design. (Hence the term "preview.") If previews for big stories are going to be like this from now on, then reviews have effectively been obsoleted.
We may as well just have a "Conclusion" piece, rather than a review of a (p)review.
@MarioPhD There actually was a certain logical code of conduct to game previews back in the print days. (Which had absolutely nothing in common with the outrageous behavior behind the GamerGate scandal.) The internet has all but evaporated those ethics, due to making them obsolete. People can still choose to abide by them or not, though.
The new ways in which previews are being handled on the internet does feel like we're still in the experimentation phase. I don't think it's so much that people are defending this game; rather, they are noticing the rift between how previews and reactive opinions used to be handled in the past compared to now. In turn, many readers have reacted harshly towards the sharp turn away from the conduct of many previously held instances of temperance.
No. Everyone wanted it to be a "Very Good" game, not just Good.
In the current state of the Wii U, and with a year that so far has been barren from very good games (except Splatoon and a couple of indies), we needed a Very Good game. And specially a mature game.
I think I'm getting it still. Several of the bad points I can live with, except for framerate inconsistency. Still, I feel that I should help support this game.
Would you buy the game for yourself? Let's say at 30 bucks or it will still not be worth it?
For me, I think I'll buy it, not at full retail, but maybe at around 35 bucks. I have the impression that it will retail for just 50 dollars but I digress.
@PlywoodStick Given that what they have isn't simply a preview build of the game but rather the final retail code, I'm guessing they view it as, if anything, ethical to let readers know well in advance about the game not being great. Back in the Gamepro days, previews were likely based on preview builds, and the publication cycle was such that a preview needed to be in advance enough to be worth it to print, otherwise, they'd simply wait to review it. Online publications aren't bound by any of that. I'm sure that if they weren't under embargo they would already have a review up, and a negative one at that. They would seem schizophrenic if they gave it a glowing preview, or even just a tepid one, and then a horrible review. People would question why they weren't warned in advance if Nintendolife knew. This seems like a meshing of having final code, but not being allowed to give full reviews due to embargo, but wanting to warn readers as much as possible as soon as possible; how is that not ethical and a concrete improvement over the past for games media?
Also, I didn't make the GamerGate crack literally and in regards to the conduct seen in other places, but instead to balk at how silly it is for everyone to invent a witch hunt and try to carry it out for no reason by rallying against games media, just like GamerGate. I'm not implying it's a 1:1 correlation between them, but rather that some similarities exist, and it's just a bit silly to see this turn into such a controversy.
Why do you keep asking us if we agree with your opinions and then to post the answer in the comments? We haven't played it. Unless you assume the majority of your readership are also reviewer from other sites that receive preview copies.
@MarioPhD In the past, the review was the warning. Previews rarely, if ever, included this level of decisiveness in steering the viewership one way or another. This was due to the public not having the same access to the product during the preview stage; thus, the final judgment was reserved for when the readers could objectively make their own decision in conjunction with the review. (Which we cannot do with a preview, since the game isn't out yet.). In this case, the final judgment has effectively already been made at the preview stage.
Twenty (or even ten) years ago, doing something like this would have been considered a premature act. It is now the new normal.
So... You want them to not take advantage of advances in the way games are made and games media is published to keep previews how you remember them? I can't see another way to construe your argument. You're saying little more than "it used to be this way and now it's not." This has nothing to do with the level of access the readership has, and everything to do with the fact that previews like these come while they have final code, something they couldn't do before, since previews were likely being done without final games. I get the sense that people want press releases instead of opinions, and if so, why bother reading the previews or reviews? Just read the Wikipedia page and watch trailers and call it a day. Previews and reviews are impressions of a game. They have the final game's code, so their preview can be more definitive and authoritative. Why wouldn't they want to do that? Other than your impression of what a preview is based on an older iteration of how games media functions, why else should the preview be less opinionated, as if they should be in the first place?
Your logic also doesn't add up when you argue that "the final judgment was reserved for when the readers could objectively make their own decision in conjunction with the review," if that's what you want and plan to do, why do you need previews or reviews whatsoever if you want to develop your own objective opinion? Again, I don't get it.
these video, even the one about the bad things, made the game look more attractive than the preview video you put on a previous article.
@MarioPhD I'm not saying they shouldn't use the tools available to them. I'm saying that previews more often than not used to be (and should be) a demonstration of journalistic objectivity. (Which includes nonpartisanship and fairness through disinterestedness... The exact opposite of this string of preview pieces.). The time for combining objectivity with subjectivity comes with the review. That is a more fair form of treatment to any product, regardless of it's quality, than to include subjectivity in a judgment prior to release.
The objective opinion formed by the reader is not mutually exclusive from the publication; rather, it is formed in conjunction with the information provided. However, there is no way for the reader to do that if they (or someone else among them) cannot lay hands on the product- they're just being told to trust someone else's word before their own participation is possible. (See errantrazor's response above for an example of this being realized.) At the time of a review, however, their word is made in conjunction with the actions available to the reader. Therein lies the foundation for the building of trust between the two- the demonstration of personal restraint up until the two can meet equally.
I'm just going to wait until the final game get's released. All this negative press isn't helping a game that I was excited to play because it filled a void in the Wii U game library. It may be justified but I'll take the wait and see approach. I'll read all the reviews of the final product and then determine wether I'll buy it first thing or wait until it goes on sale based upon that. Until the final game is released I think it is premature to say what type of game it is going to be. Especially if there is a multiplayer component to the game.
They have the final build of the game for reviewing, but they can't play the online mode until release.
All these previews and good/bad videos are about 10% of the game. We still haven't seen the main mode of the game, the 90% that is online multiplayer.
@CinisterD thanks and no problem - you're allowed to read other sites too
@maceng haha, yeah, a very good game would of been nice. I do think that's why everyone is being so vocal about this one!
Picking up on some of the comments from @PlywoodStick and @MarioPHD around the 'Preview'. Typically we have four types of article that we try and stick to:
First Impressions - when we have a brief time with a game, almost always a preview/demo build.
Hands On - when we have more time with a game, usually on location and almost always preview build.
Preview - when we have either a preview build or final code ourselves and can play at our leisure.
Review - well, obviously always final code.
It's becoming more common to do previews with final code, simply because it's available long before any review embargos. I guess it's a slightly different style to say GamePro back in the day, but it's been working well for us so far.
@PlywoodStick You seem rather obsessed with a notion of objectivity which really doesn't make any sense in the context of someone's opinions in regards to a game; an opinion on a game will be subjective, regardless. You seem to also take issue with the idea that the preview is coloring the opinions of the readers.... again.... that is EXACTLY what they are meant to do. Based on your objections, I'm forced to think you're determined to think this game will be good, and don't like that someone disagrees with you, and your responses come from the fact that you're frustrated that can't disprove them because you don't have the game for yourself. I'm not saying that's the reality of the situation, but rather, it's the only way I can rationalize your arguments, because they don't make sense. You talk about "objective opinions," which have never been what previews have been about. I didn't see you or anyone else getting up in arms over the lack of "objective opinions" in the Star Fox Zero impressions posted on this site at E3. Why is this an issue now, when we've clearly seen previews of games (though, in this case, classified as @antdickens notes, as a First Impressions) that are not thoroughly objective?
For that matter, since when was a "demonstration of journalistic objectivity" important to you in games media? How long have you actually been following it? I have since the 90s when I actively subscribed to and devoured GamePro every month, and never once have I seen this "journalistic objectivity." Again, if you want objectivity, look at the Wikipedia page, look at the features list, watch gameplay without any commentary, and don't bother with inherently opinionated genres of writing, like reviews, previews, and anything that involves any sort of impressions (aka, opinions, which are subjective and based on biases and values that simply do not align with objectivity). I'd recommend you get your games news from the publishers themselves instead, but the idea of them being objective is similarly laughable. Games media is not, and has not, been objective or journalistic in quality for a very long time (if it ever even was, given that games media was targeted primarily at children, and perhaps parents, when it began since Nintendo resurrected the industry by making the NES seem like a toy instead of a gaming console, thus coloring public opinion of the medium to this day), and I think that's to its benefit. Looking for something more high brow? Go to Kill Screen. Go to Critical Distance. This is a Nintendo website, and essentially, a Nintendo blog, like all major games media is now. You're expecting standards that don't exist from a publication that wouldn't make sense to have them, from genres of writing that are inherently subjective. So either you've never been happy with games media and never will since your expectations can't align with reality, or your overall argument comes down to "I don't like how negative the preview was." Which, hey, that's fine. That's something you can debate with people, but dressing it up in issues of "journalistic objectivity" makes it seem like you don't understand what a preview is or how they should function.
That said, I have no interest in pursuing this conversation any further if your only contribution to it will be to stick to your guns about the myth of journalistic objectivity you're seeking here. You've taken on a very formal tone in your last reply, so I can tell you take your stance seriously, but I can't see how it aligns with reality, frankly, and if that's our only back and forth on the matter, I'm finished here since I can tell neither of us will budge, which is perfectly fine. You're perfectly entitled to not like the way the preview was conducted and argue that it was too negative for your taste, but the language you're using to communicate that simply doesn't make any sense. I wish you well regardless, and appreciate that you care about the site, as do I.
@Damo D'awww. Thanks. I've been a huge fan of the site since late 2010. I had something of a falling out with games when I got out of high school. From about 2005 to 2010 (when my wife got me a Wii for Christmas) the most I would play was retro games I emulated on my old laptop when I was in college. I was too busy and broke to have a console, and simply wasn't very interested in gaming. I actually did research on the Zelda games for my major senior seminar project, which rekindled my love for gaming and helped me see the academic applications for it which was really cool. My wife got me the Wii so I could play Skyward Sword when it came out, and the only other major Zelda game I'd never played up to that point: Twilight Princess, the game whose delay played a huge role in me giving up on gaming for a good while.
I was looking for a place to get Nintendo news back when I got my Wii, and a friend pointed me to Nintendolife and I've been checking the site daily ever since. You folks do some great work, and while I tend to be a bit more quiet around these parts (especially since I think that the comments set up here makes ongoing conversations a bit difficult to follow), this whole thing with Devil's Third has forced me to speak out a bit more than I otherwise would, since it's silly.
Love the site, and would be happy to give more back in any way I can in the future! I spend an obscene amount of time on the site when I'm not busy with tons of other work I have, so I'd be happy in future to do admin stuff around the site in the comments sections and such, or given my love of writing (I am, actually, working on a PhD in Rhetoric and Composition, aka writing studies, and have focused in my Masters work on games and writing, so my screen name isn't entirely facetious), I'd be happy to contribute to the site as well, as doing some writing about games is something I've wanted to do for quite some time but have always been a bit too worried about asking folks about.
Just throwing all that out there to say I have a ton of respect for the site, and would be happy to be more involved as well. Keep up the good work, everyone!
@MarioPhD Woops, you're right, an objective opinion is an oxymoron... I didn't think that through when I was typing it. I had a particular idea in mind, but it doesn't mean much without giving examples.
I'll leave this issue at that from now on, as you say.
@PlywoodStick No worries. Sorry if I was a bit rude there. Hope all's well in your world, and game on!
Tap here to load 94 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...