Gameinformer was hating on BlazBlue because of how difficult it was.
I lol’d IRL.
From GI:
^ you mean theres moves more complicated than hadokens and shoryukens? This game is TOO HORD!!!
i came from the pong era, just letting be know :razz:
what is the point of a review if you would put a douche who doesnt know anything about the genre or wouldnt give a descent review (take his/her time to go trough what the game has to offer), its like youre going to put me to make a review about madden, when
a) i dont know anything about the american football
and b) i hate the game anywway
the mentallity behind this reatards is beyond me
it has to do a lot, sf4 scored high reviews for the nostalgia factor, not hating on the game, but you really think that with the graphic standards of this time, sf4 would score a 9 or 10, hell no, many of my friends that arent fighting game hardcores, think that the graphics of sf4 are meh, even some of them think that the graphics looks like ps2 graphics, also they complaint about the complexity of bb, yet this game is pretty much more noob friendly than sf4, where because is linked oriented it makes extremly difficult for the noobs to start over, also they complait for the story when sf4 doesnt even offer a story to begin with, yeah, i dont see any bias on the sf4 reviews :rolleyes:
People still read GI in this day and age? Wow.
I stopped giving two shits about what GI had to say years ago. Only reason GI is still alive is because GameStop sponsors their garbage magazines. Otherwise, they’d be just as S.O.L. as EGM (who didn’t even deserve to go under).
Sorry to inform you, but I am afraid that you have several friends who are blind. SFIV might not be the best looking game, but to suggest that it could be done on last generation hardware is a joke.
Secondly reread his post… “who never in their life played Streetfighter… never even heard about it”
You want to point out where in that statement he inferred that these reviewers who heard about or played SF before love the game or have some sense of nostalgia for it?
And again you mind pointing out how being aware of something or playing a game will make someone write a biased review?
I am aware of and have heard BackStreet Boys…don’t think I would be giving them a positive review based on the fact I am aware of who they are. Not saying that none of the SFIV reviews were biased, but the guy’s statement is retarded.
i know that, yet it clearly shows how the casuals see this game, nothing outsanding yet, in every review that i saw they give 10 for graphics :looney:
Yeah I freely admit it isn’t a 10 (although I think the PC benchmark looks a lot better than my ps3).
I don’t know maybe Capcom paid for some of the reviews lol…going from some of the reviewer gameplay I wouldn’t put it out of the question.
IMO its a companies agendum to creates games that break barriers. No matter who the audience is, a good game is a good game. Take Wii Golf as an example.
a) I don’t know anything about Golf
b) I hate golf anyway
Now almost EVERYONE I know enjoys the game and has a blast playing it, no matter what the demographic. I’m not denying that the reviewers came off as a tad bit biased, but isn’t that the point of having opinions? The beauty of it all is that we get both sides of the spectrum, one who likes fighters and the fighting game community (IGN), and one who despises it (GI).
Only GI gave SFIV and even SCIV high scores yet rate BB poorly (for silly reasons). Really, how can you complain about noticeable diversity amongst characters in a fighting game as if that’s a con and not a pro? GI is just a garbage gaming magazine.
Oh stop
It has nothing to do with the quality of the magazine you just don’t agree with the score
People always cry “IGNorant” and the like whenever they rate games bad, but now that they give a game you like a great score they’re the best and most reliable source
I’ve only read what SugaFree posted, but GI is absolutely right. As much as we want all reviewers that review fighting games to be well-versed in the genre, the fact is, reviews should take into account both those familiar to the genre, and those who are still wary about entering it. Not everyone is interested into getting deep into fighting games like most of us here, so the accessibility of a game to new players should be noted. It’s true that BlazBlue is an uphill battle of just getting basic bnbs and techniques down if you’re new to these sorts of games. IGN mentions that it’s very easy to pick up and get basic combos and flashy stuff down, but GI notes that’s it’s difficult to progress beyond that point.
Heck, GI doesn’t even sound very malicious from what SugaFree posted. Sure, he doesn’t have the experience to say much in how it plays and such, but it allows insight from a newcomer about BlazBlue and how it felt to play from a casual perspective - AKA many of the people who aren’t already guaranteed to buy BlazBlue. Their job isn’t to please the people that already support the game, it’s just about saying how the game felt to them. If you know the reviewer was a casual, and he rates it poorly, that says something about how easy the game is to pick up and play at a decent level to a casual audience.
Fix’d
Is it just one guy doing all fighting game reviews? If not, well, yeah there’s going to be contradictions for different games. Heck, some people’s opinion on something can be completely different after just 24 hours.
I forget exactly how GI runs in terms of reviews but I’m sure it’s similar to how IGN runs, meaning they don’t have the FPS fans of the company review RPGs and whatnot. As for having a different opinion in 24 hours, that’s the difference between first impressions and reviews.
I don’t know about that, seems like he wasn’t too sure when making comparisons to Guilty Gear in anything but visual style, so I can’t say if his taste in fighting games expands beyond what he’s already familiar with. As for the second statement, it’s true. But time seems to be the major constraining factor.
In the end, I think we can agree that asking a good buddy or trying the game yourself is the best way to see if the game suits you.
I miss EGM so much. 
Last good gaming rag.
So a FPS should be slammed because it takes forever to learn maps, weapon respawn timers, spawn points and weapon mechanics to become more than frag fodder? Please, spare me this. No offense to you, but that’s BS. All video games have a learning curve, and the guy didn’t even get past the first hurdle.
Anyone who picks up a game, looks at his controller and goes “I don’t want to learn this game.” isn’t looking to play a game.
Making a review that says Halo sucks because he goes into multiplayer and can’t kill anybody would be bullshit journalism. Halo sucks for far more different reasons than that, but not knowing the game is not one of them.
Oh, and I would call: “Am I playing a 2D fighting game or a drug-induced gothic hallucination? Blazblue features a stable of improbable characters using ridiculous attacks to beat each other up in satisfying ways.” pretty malicious. What did they rate that game where an indian man stretches his arms and a japanese bum throws fireballs again?
Considering the following words are coming from a person completely terrible at FPS games, feel free to totally ignore it. But if maps are confusing to navigate for a beginner due to just plain design flaw ie. no landmarks, everything looking the same, then it’s a valid complaint in my opinion, even though a person that might have spend an hour or two will be able to navigate it fairly easily. Give them a slap on the wrist, tell them to keep playing, and there you go.Weapon timers, small stuff like that all that are simply things you pick up with time. Huh, sort of like Blazblue.
Don’t get me wrong, I do think he should have spent further time with the game. Also, no offense taken, I can totally see where you’re coming from though, and I can see the frustration in how he just barely cracked the glass to get into the delicious meaty parts. I’m just saying that his review should just be taken as it is; a review by a person inexperienced in fighting games, and simply just providing first impressions of the game. Unlike our buddy playing FPS games with us, we can’t really give a slap on the wrist to the reviewer (although it would be nice).
I apologize if I came on rough, but I personally think it’s somewhat silly how much flak is targeted at GI just because (well, ignoring their relatively bad rep already) they didn’t get any knowledgeable fighting fans doing BlazBlue. It may be because I take almost all reviews like a grain of salt unless they’re stating direct facts, but I think it’s perfectly fine to let GI slide on their first impressions of the game. I’d much rather he clearly state that he had problems getting into the game rather than allowing nostalgia to fuel the review, which was the case of a ton of SFIV reviews.
It’s a bummer that he might have had that “I don’t feel like playing” mentality, but at least he mentioned why he might have gotten that mentality in the first place. Despite ASW’s attempts at making it more friendly to newcomers, moving up the difficulty slope is still harsh to a newbie like him. Simple as that. However, it would have been best if that guy would have been able to make comparisons to other fighters outside of looks and difficulty curve. That’s the main problem with getting inexperienced peopl to do reviews. Said reviews are usually silly-vague. Revealing background info on his tastes would have been helpful as well.
“Making a review that says Halo sucks because he goes into multiplayer and can’t kill anybody would be bullshit journalism.”
True, but is he says something like, “It’s difficult for new people to kill people online in this game (I’m making one up) because the weapon you’re provided with does terrible damage compared to the gear given to the people that have already reached higher ranks” or whatever, but the truth is that some of the best people use the weaker gun because it actually has better accuracy compared to all the guns given to the higher ranks, I’d still think it’s an alright statement. Sure, it doesn’t factor in the fact that the reviewer actually sucks, but it tells us that for a new person, there might be some difficulty moving up the ranks. That alone is too vague, but cross-referencing other reviews, you should be able to get a better feel for the underlying problems that each reviewer criticizes. It’s completely BS that we actually have to cross-reference in the first place instead of having reviewers admit that they’re terrible at the game, but hey, what can you do. My opinion of GI’s review might be what it is solely because of cross-referencing reviews.
But that’s why just trying it for yourself is the best, especially when accompanied by a good friend that can tell you what’s happening.
“Am I playing a 2D fighting game or a drug-induced gothic hallucination? Blazblue features a stable of improbable characters using ridiculous attacks to beat each other up in satisfying ways.”
I took it as a joke, but I might (probably the likelier choice too) just be emotionally stupid.
http://www.gameinformer.com/NR/exeres/A4EB0E47-51F5-4184-85D0-B1814B4A0E0A.htm?CS_pid=210556
That’s pretty much all that needs to be said.
Are they serious?
They make it very hard for me to defend my position.