Sensitive Biscuit

SB2013 · 05-04-2013 11:14pm #1

So I decided to ask TotalBiscuit if he believed his Sim City coverage seemed a bit compromised considering his criticism of IGN and Bioshock Infinite. There then followed a brief Twitter exchange.

@Totalbiscuit Do you not think your criticism of IGN was a little hollow considering your "WTF is" the day before Sim City launch?

@Seanbeag1 not in any way

@Seanbeag1 unless of course you can show me the week of Sim City promotional videos I was posting prior to that video

@Seanbeag1 I don't think you understand the situation at all

@Totalbiscuit A 1 1/2 hour pre-release video from yourself singing a games praises is quite a big hype. "A glorious simulation" it was not

@Seanbeag1 You are beyond stupid. Yeah man, let's ignore the fact that my wife was on that video criticizing the **** out of it

@Totalbiscuit And considering the beta access TGS members seemed to have, it's hard not to wonder if it was compromised

@Seanbeag1 But yeah it's totally the same. I'm embarrassed to have you as a follower

At this stage he blocked me then started posting status updates like the following complaining about the stupidity of gamers.

TB: "You liked Sim City before it came out so you are a sell-out" - some ****ing idiot fan

TB: The most pervasive problem within gamers right now is a complete lack of critical thinking and analytical ability.

TB: Which results in stupid opinions based in shallow surface-level fallacious interpretations of what is actually happening.

TB: And you might say "oh it's just the vocal minority". No it really is not, you see it EVERYWHERE, false equivalency all over the place.

TB: So yeah, thank you to those of you who are smarter than that.

So it escalated rather quickly. Maybe I was out of line but I don't think so. Sim City is a fundamentally broken game and, in my opinion, those who reviewed it pre-release and didn't highlight this did a great dis-service to their followers and viewers. Was I out of line or did TB over-react a little?

Turtwig · 05-04-2013 11:52pm

Calling you beyond stupid was totally uncalled for. The subsequent bitching about you or somebody else in public tweets was just juvenile. It reminded of me of those pathetic "People are stoopiddd" type posts on facebook. Honestly, some people think when they get followers or a bit of success that makes them experts in the field of whatever their perceived success is in. Not true, and if you are an expert you still don't treat people like crap. Attack the points, not the pointer.

johnny_ultimate · 06-04-2013 12:00am

From what I've seen of Total Biscuit - which is, granted, a limited selection given my general low tolerance for his presentational style - the man criticising others for a lack of critical insight is a little rich. He has a point amongst the childish name calling - one just needs to look at the wealth of shallow, barely engaged responses to Bioshock Infinite to see that - but he is not the paragon of smart, intellectually engaged gaming criticism he seems to think he is.

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 12:04am

Take a listen to the last 5 minutes of his promo piece for Sim City. It's like one of those testimonials you hear on late night ads for exercise machines.

But the criticism i was referring to was his comments on IGN getting one week exclusive early access to Bioshock Infinite in exchange for a week of promotion and a launch day review. He claimed IGN should not have accepted it. I found it a little hypocritical as he had accepted early access of Sim City for reviewing.

Varik · 06-04-2013 12:12am

Only really watch his planetside stuff for which he was critical of at times even though he seemed to be a fan.

And there's a difference between getting early access with is normal for game reviews and doing a deal like IGN did; personally don't care dislike IGN at all.

platinums · 06-04-2013 12:32am

TB recently did a Vlog about him spending $10k to be at some trade show in the US and he was complaining that he wasnt getting the hits on the videos. I randomly came across that vid and after watchin took a look at his declining viewer ship on the last posted vids.

OP go tthe brunt of some misplaced anger perhaps. Everything stems from something.

WOCM4 · 06-04-2013 12:50am

Fek TB

yahtzee is the king.

I do like TB but you were right OP.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/7053-SimCity

lol, dog bollok city

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 12:53am

Varik wrote: »

Only really watch his planetside stuff for which he was critical of at times even though he seemed to be a fan.

And there's a difference between getting early access with is normal for game reviews and doing a deal like IGN did; personally don't care dislike IGN at all.

I agree. It just seemed odd to me that a number of big TGS members had so much fun playing it before release without noticing the issues. I felt the same about their coverage of Paradox games, specifically Dungeonland, Game of Dwarves and War of the Roses.

platinums wrote: »

TB recently did a Vlog about him spending $10k to be at some trade show in the US and he was complaining that he wasnt getting the hits on the videos. I randomly came across that vid and after watchin took a look at his declining viewer ship on the last posted vids.

OP go tthe brunt of some misplaced anger perhaps. Everything stems from something.

Yes i saw that vlog. There was a reddit post too. Despite his lower individual video views his subs are still rising though. i think the low views were just because of Pax itself not being too interesting.

taytothief · 06-04-2013 2:52am

That guy really pisses me off. I watched a video of him at PAX on Project Shield and he's sitting there in his "please take me seriously, I'm a serious businessman" suit and his hilarious comb-over, and he even at one point tries to cut in front of the dude from Nvidia to get the camera to focus on his console. The man is a clown. I have absolutely no doubt he will (and does) sell-out consistently.

elfy4eva · 06-04-2013 3:05am

Stopped watching TB nearly a year ago. I think he has a rightly snobbish attitude altogether. His loss mate!

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 7:48am

Well in this case, he might went over board, there is no excuse going "**** stormy" like that. Though all the boardsies being so perfect and all, never making mistakes and always being spot on with their opinion....

I like TB, I like his old mailbox and the new "content patch" shows. His wtf is a good "first impressions" videos with good gameplay showcase.
I like his as commentator, even if others "semi pros" don't. He is fun to listen to. I am still a Tastless and Artosis fan, but TB is good at it in his own way.

His wtf of simcity was fair aside as I watched it ( I did not finished it ). He pointed out all the **** in it and was direct with it. He did mentioned that it could be a good game after issues ironed out. Keep in mind, he was able to play it with no/almost no major server issues. He did mentioned that it will be a cluster**** on launch. Everyone expected that, but EA cluster**** was quite legendary.
As from him being hypocritical in simcity vs bioshock is a bit bull****. All major reviewers had early access to the game. So everyone could and did the same thing. Where's bioshock infinite was a complete "let's buy a review lads".
In a way I don't know why 2k even did it... It had already shiet loads of publicity and bioshock was a game, that almost everyone wanted to play. I presume no one expected if to be colonial marines in heaven.

Anyway. I like his content, but I would not fallow him blindly. Like any human he does a feck up, so i dont approve on how he handled your situation OP. If you don't like him, don't watch him. That is the beauty of living in democratic countries!

mayordenis · 06-04-2013 9:00am

He seems like a knob, whoever decided to mention yahtzee, he's also a knob.

To be honest the whole industry is riddled with knobs, complete sausage fest.

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 9:26am

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Well in this case, he might went over board, there is no excuse going "**** stormy" like that. Though all the boardsies being so perfect and all, never making mistakes and always being spot on with their opinion....

Don't think anyone claimed to be perfect. They just don't think you should act like a dick just because you aren't.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

I like TB, I like his old mailbox and the new "content patch" shows. His wtf is a good "first impressions" videos with good gameplay showcase.
I like his as commentator, even if others "semi pros" don't. He is fun to listen to. I am still a Tastless and Artosis fan, but TB is good at it in his own way.

I liked his Mailbox but i find the amount of production he puts into his content patch means its old news when its released. His WTF series seems to miss many good games. He often gives out that its because he doesn't get free review copies of the game. Still, sometimes you can find a nice gem in the series. I dont listen to his commentary anymore. He doesn't seem to know much about SC2 these days.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

His wtf of simcity was fair aside as I watched it ( I did not finished it ). He pointed out all the **** in it and was direct with it. He did mentioned that it could be a good game after issues ironed out. Keep in mind, he was able to play it with no/almost no major server issues. He did mentioned that it will be a cluster**** on launch. Everyone expected that, but EA cluster**** was quite legendary.
As from him being hypocritical in simcity vs bioshock is a bit bull****. All major reviewers had early access to the game. So everyone could and did the same thing. Where's bioshock infinite was a complete "let's buy a review lads".

"Sim City is a complex game." "As a simulation it excels." It's a really awesome game" "It's really really good and don't let anyone tell you otherwise because they're liars. They're wrong. They're just straight up wrong."

All those quotes are from the last 6 minutes. TB pointed out issues with modding, always on drm and resource usage. His wife was a little more astute. Spotted an issue with the AI at one stage but it wasn't expanded on.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

In a way I don't know why 2k even did it... It had already shiet loads of publicity and bioshock was a game, that almost everyone wanted to play. I presume no one expected if to be colonial marines in heaven.

It's not hard to understand why they might do it. IGN put massive amounts of material out on games. Wakthroughs, wikis, reviews and much more. Giving them time to prepare all this while still keeping them under an NDA is quite smart. It's not hard to see how this kind of relationship can be abused though. But there is no evidence of this happening in Bioshock. Yeah they hyped it up but it's a pretty amazing game by all accounts. EA went with non-exclusive prerelease press copies and they all got it wrong.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Anyway. I like his content, but I would not fallow him blindly. Like any human he does a feck up, so i dont approve on how he handled your situation OP. If you don't like him, don't watch him. That is the beauty of living in democratic countries!

It's not about messing up though. It's about how it is handled. A tirade of abuse to someone for asking a question is ridiculous. If that's the best he can come up with I wonder does he actually write his own script for his shows.

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 11:10am

and yet another reason to dislike that man, i gave up watching his WTFis videos after he openly announced he would be boycotting mass effect 3, after he reviewed it lol

edit: he reviewed the free me3 multiplayer demo, appeared to really enjoy it, then boycotted the game.

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 11:18am

degrassinoel wrote: »

and yet another reason to dislike that man, i gave up watching his WTFis videos after he openly announced he would be boycotting mass effect 3, after he reviewed it lol

edit: he reviewed the free me3 multiplayer demo, appeared to really enjoy it, then boycotted the game.

His reason for ME3 boycott was the "From Ashes" DLC. His reasoning being that if it was on the disk on release it should not have been DLC. He was right to criticise it but a boycott was OTT.

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 11:22am

I think you quite missing the point there lads. He is not doing reviews, he is doing "first impressions". It's opinions, not reviews, he pointed that put himself good few times. As we know reviews are not opinions and the other way around.

If you are taking those things as reviews, then it's your own problem. It would be the same as taking yatzees "reviews" seriously and not as entertainment show.

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 11:27am

His insistence on claiming he doesn't do reviews is also a little hollow. Reviews have no standard. A person can review a games based on an hour of gameplay or a whole playthrough and both can be just as legitimate. Total Biscuit tends to play the game quite a while before his "first" impressions too so it's not a accurate description for his type of video. He reviews games. He judges them on graphics, resource usage, control, plot and many other things. How is that not a review?

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 11:28am

that's exactly how i figured it, he inisists he's not a reviewer too, but gives his opinion on what the games he's playing are anyway, which is basically reviewing it.

Anyway, i think what he said back to you was deliberately insulting and incredibly arrogant.
I had to read it twice and still ask myself Did he honestly say he was embarrassed to have someone as a follower for asking a question?

ancapailldorcha · 06-04-2013 11:28am

SB2013 wrote: »

His reason for ME3 boycott was the "From Ashes" DLC. His reasoning being that if it was on the disk on release it should not have been DLC. He was right to criticise it but a boycott was OTT.

In what way was a boycott OTT? Giving From Ashes to anyone who bought the game new would have been fine (Providing they had an internet connection) but releasing it as day 1 DLC was taking the p!ss.

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 11:33am

degrassinoel wrote: »

that's exactly how i figured it, he inisists he's not a reviewer too, but gives his opinion on what the games he's playing are anyway, which is basically reviewing it.

Anyway, i think what he said back to you was deliberately insulting and incredibly arrogant.
I had to read it twice and still ask myself Did he honestly say he was embarrassed to have someone as a follower for asking a question?

Well it's not the worst thing he's said to someone.

What I'd really like to know though is if people agree with me on pre-release review copies. I find them just as bad a practice as exclusive pre-release copies. They create a dependence between the reviewer and the publisher, especially with a big publisher like EA who is putting out a ton of big titles.

The thing about Bioshock and IGn is that it's hard to say if they sold out because the game was amazing anyway. It's much easier to see a trend with a game like Sim City or A Game of Dwarves. So as far as i can see there is just as much, if not more, evidence to indicate reviewers of Sim City were compromised than there is of IGN.

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 11:33am

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

In what way was a boycott OTT? Giving From Ashes to anyone who bought the game new would have been fine (Providing they had an internet connection) but releasing it as day 1 DLC was taking the p!ss.

besides the point if someone is going to make videos "reviewing games" and openly boycotts a AAA title.

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 11:35am

SB2013 wrote: »

His insistence on claiming he doesn't do reviews is also a little hollow. Reviews have no standard. A person can review a games based on an hour of gameplay or a whole playthrough and both can be just as legitimate. Total Biscuit tends to play the game quite a while before his "first" impressions too so it's not a accurate description for his type of video. He reviews games. He judges them on graphics, resource usage, control, plot and many other things. How is that not a review?

That's the main problem, which people don't understand.

When a review is based on personal opinion, then review is bad. I don't like resident evil 6. I think it is pile of shiet. If I would review it and just say my opinion on how shiet it is, just because it is not classic resident evil, then my review flawed and useless.
If I state it is my personal opinion and not a review. It means I am looking from my own personal point of view and don't look at the bigger picture.

As I said before. He could have reacted better and he did acted like a dick. That's is it. He is not a god, he bleeds like anyone else. He is mortal. He does mistakes too. So what's next? Where do we steer this thread now.

COYVB · 06-04-2013 11:39am

SB2013 wrote: »

Take a listen to the last 5 minutes of his promo piece for Sim City. It's like one of those testimonials you hear on late night ads for exercise machines.

But the criticism i was referring to was his comments on IGN getting one week exclusive early access to Bioshock Infinite in exchange for a week of promotion and a launch day review. He claimed IGN should not have accepted it. I found it a little hypocritical as he had accepted early access of Sim City for reviewing.

The difference was that EVERYONE had early access to Sim City for reviewing. Well, technically EVERYONE had early access to BioShock too, but only IGN were allowed to post their review early.

The difference between the cases was that IGN essentially bought the rights to be the first ones to talk about the finished BioShock product, whereas with Sim City every single semi respectable outlet was in the same boat - everyone had the game pre-releases (and it actually worked when it was just the media on the servers)

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 11:39am

SB2013 wrote: »

Well it's not the worst thing he's said to someone.

What I'd really like to know though is if people agree with me on pre-release review copies. I find them just as bad a practice as exclusive pre-release copies. They create a dependence between the reviewer and the publisher, especially with a big publisher like EA who is putting out a ton of big titles.

The thing about Bioshock and IGn is that it's hard to say if they sold out because the game was amazing anyway. It's much easier to see a trend with a game like Sim City or A Game of Dwarves. So as far as i can see there is just as much, if not more, evidence to indicate reviewers of Sim City were compromised than there is of IGN.

previews and reviews should always have a thick line separating them.
as for TB, like i said.. gave up on watching his crap last year. kind of glad after seeing that display.

COYVB · 06-04-2013 11:42am

ShadowHearth wrote: »

When a review is based on personal opinion, then review is bad

ALL reviews are based on personal opinion though. That's the nature of them. Some people like some things, others dislike them. There are obviously things that are universally "bad" or "good", such as broken gameplay mechanics, but beyond that, it's personal preference that makes a non-broken game either a 7/10 or a 9/10

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 11:45am

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

In what way was a boycott OTT? Giving From Ashes to anyone who bought the game new would have been fine (Providing they had an internet connection) but releasing it as day 1 DLC was taking the p!ss.

It wasn't necessary to play or finish the game. The game was brilliant without it. It added some good extra background and a decent unit but that's all. It didn't affect the overall game. It was a bad play on behalf of EA but the game itself was still worth the money withour the dlc.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

That's the main problem, which people don't understand.

When a review is based on personal opinion, then review is bad. I don't like resident evil 6. I think it is pile of shiet. If I would review it and just say my opinion on how shiet it is, just because it is not classic resident evil, then my review flawed and useless.
If I state it is my personal opinion and not a review. It means I am looking from my own personal point of view and don't look at the bigger picture.

As I said before. He could have reacted better and he did acted like a dick. That's is it. He is not a god, he bleeds like anyone else. He is mortal. He does mistakes too. So what's next? Where do we steer this thread now.

Like I said, there is no standard for reviews. They can take any form. I still don't see what makes Total Biscuits WTF different to a review.

As to the thread, I'd like peoples opinions on wether IGNs deal is that much different to any other pre-release review copy. More in it for IGN and more open to abuse but surely the same effect on the reliability of the review.

COYVB · 06-04-2013 11:50am

SB2013 wrote: »

I'd like peoples opinions on wether IGNs deal is that much different to any other pre-release review copy. More in it for IGN and more open to abuse but surely the same effect on the reliability of the review.

It is very different TBH. It happens occasionally, basically an outlet will pay a publisher for exclusive first review rights. The problem is that they either need to give the game a great review, or an awful one because of the exclusivity. A middle of the road review will mean wasted expenditure that isn't turned into hits (which is what this is all about).

If IGN deem an early exclusive review worth X amount, they'll know how many hits they need, roughly, to make it pay off, therefore you cannot trust that the review is in any way accurate unless you've played the game yourself.

Everyone had BioShock Infinite at the same time - the difference was that IGN had bought the rights for the first review to be published

Jonny7 · 06-04-2013 12:07pm

taytothief wrote: »

That guy really pisses me off. I watched a video of him at PAX on Project Shield and he's sitting there in his "please take me seriously, I'm a serious businessman" suit and his hilarious comb-over, and he even at one point tries to cut in front of the dude from Nvidia to get the camera to focus on his console. The man is a clown. I have absolutely no doubt he will (and does) sell-out consistently.

He used to organise tournaments from his own money and he is running a small Starcraft 2 team (which costs a fortune) via tshirt sales and so on.

He's pretty committed to gaming and all that in fairness. I wouldn't call the man a sell out.

He's just too affected by other people's opinions and often overreacts.

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 12:11pm

SB2013 wrote: »

It wasn't necessary to play or finish the game. The game was brilliant without it. It added some good extra background and a decent unit but that's all. It didn't affect the overall game. It was a bad play on behalf of EA but the game itself was still worth the money withour the dlc.

Like I said, there is no standard for reviews. They can take any form. I still don't see what makes Total Biscuits WTF different to a review.

As to the thread, I'd like peoples opinions on wether IGNs deal is that much different to any other pre-release review copy. More in it for IGN and more open to abuse but surely the same effect on the reliability of the review.

There is no standard, but there should be. That's why we got "bought reviews", "low quality reviews", "opinion based reviews".

Let alone a very huge difference between reviews and what TB does. Any review will be of a finished game. Any reviewer who reviews game will have finished game, checked all content, done his home work on title. TB jumps on to a title, plays for a bit, says his opinion on what he sees and then moves on.

Stop putting review and opinion in to the same pot. Those are two different things.

ancapailldorcha · 06-04-2013 12:16pm

degrassinoel wrote: »

besides the point if someone is going to make videos "reviewing games" and openly boycotts a AAA title.

Well, if he didn't get a free review copy then he's perfectly right not to buy it IMO.

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 12:18pm

reviews are entirely made up of someones opinions ShadowHearth. Like has been said already there is no industry standard rating for reviewing a title, anyone can do it. TB is living proof of it. Problem is that, someone who's opinion you used to think was critical and solid is looking like it's being skewed by the companies who publish/develop the games he's reviewing, financially or otherwise.

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 12:20pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Well, if he didn't get a free review copy then he's perfectly right not to buy it IMO.

Yeah lol

Although he's been arguing that he's not a reviewer aswell. Which imo is ridiculous, and EA should have thrown him a bone.

ancapailldorcha · 06-04-2013 12:29pm

SB2013 wrote: »

It wasn't necessary to play or finish the game. The game was brilliant without it. It added some good extra background and a decent unit but that's all. It didn't affect the overall game. It was a bad play on behalf of EA but the game itself was still worth the money withour the dlc.

The Prothean squad member was such an important part of the lore. Yes, he wasn't needed to break the game and he doesn't add all that much but when you consider how important the Protheans are to the franchise's lore and then EA using that to charge for DLC on top of a full price game. I consider that ridiculous. Only for the fact I discovered the series less than a year ago I was able to get ME3 quite for £15 so I didn't mind paying for the DLC but if it came out now, I'd refuse to buy it.
What TB said to you was childish at best but it doesn't invalidate everything he says. Whether or not he's a tool is subjective, I watch his videos because I think he's quite well informed and I'd take his opinion over the likes of IGN any day.

COYVB · 06-04-2013 12:44pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

There is no standard, but there should be

How could there ever be a standard for something that boils down to "does the person writing this like the game?" in fairness? Do you like chicken? Because lots of people don't. If one who did and one who didn't wrote reviews about chicken, one would be positive, one would be negative. Why?

Because of personal opinion.

That's all reviews are - personal opinion - whether about games, movies, cars, software, food, or anything else

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 1:08pm

COYVB wrote: »

How could there ever be a standard for something that boils down to "does the person writing this like the game?" in fairness? Do you like chicken? Because lots of people don't. If one who did and one who didn't wrote reviews about chicken, one would be positive, one would be negative. Why?

Because of personal opinion.

That's all reviews are - personal opinion - whether about games, movies, cars, software, food, or anything else

REVIEW =/= OPINION, PREVIEW, FIRST LOOK.

o·pin·ion [uh-pin-yuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.

re·view (r-vy)
v. re·viewed, re·view·ing, re·views
v.tr.
1. To look over, study, or examine again.
2. To consider retrospectively; look back on.
3. To examine with an eye to criticism or correction: reviewed the research findings.
4. To write or give a critical report on (a new work or performance, for example).
5. Law To reexamine (an action or determination) judicially, especially in a higher court, in order to correct possible errors.
6. To subject to a formal inspection, especially a military inspection.

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 1:23pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

REVIEW =/= OPINION, PREVIEW, FIRST LOOK.

o·pin·ion [uh-pin-yuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.

re·view (r-vy)
v. re·viewed, re·view·ing, re·views
v.tr.
1. To look over, study, or examine again.
2. To consider retrospectively; look back on.
3. To examine with an eye to criticism or correction: reviewed the research findings.
4. To write or give a critical report on (a new work or performance, for example).
5. Law To reexamine (an action or determination) judicially, especially in a higher court, in order to correct possible errors.
6. To subject to a formal inspection, especially a military inspection.

I'm pretty sure people who post here can distinguish the difference between the two without you having to copy and paste a dictionary definition dude. What was your point before that?

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 1:25pm

degrassinoel wrote: »

I'm pretty sure people who post here can distinguish the difference between the two without you having to copy and paste a dictionary definition dude. What was your point before that?

Well that was the last resort... When person says he is doing preview, first look, "opinion" work and then people bashing him, because they take his work as a REVIEW.

bradlente · 06-04-2013 1:27pm

I thought this thread was about a new indie game.:o

SB2013 · 06-04-2013 1:28pm

Ok perhaps we're getting a little off the point. The lack of any kind of industry standard for a review makes it very hard to distinguish between a mere opinion piece and review. And we all will have different opinions on Total Biscuits content.

Leaving IGN and Bioshock out of it, do people think early access offers to games compromise a reviewer in any way?

COYVB · 06-04-2013 1:29pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

REVIEW =/= OPINION, PREVIEW, FIRST LOOK.

o·pin·ion [uh-pin-yuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.

re·view (r-vy)
v. re·viewed, re·view·ing, re·views
v.tr.
1. To look over, study, or examine again.
2. To consider retrospectively; look back on.
3. To examine with an eye to criticism or correction: reviewed the research findings.
4. To write or give a critical report on (a new work or performance, for example).
5. Law To reexamine (an action or determination) judicially, especially in a higher court, in order to correct possible errors.
6. To subject to a formal inspection, especially a military inspection.

Look at number 4 from the review heading. That's what game reviews are, they're critical reports on a new work. That critical report will always be based on the opinion of the person in question

If you and a friend to go a restaurant and both order the same thing, one of you might love it, the other might not. If both reviewed the meal, one would be more positive than the other because of personal taste. You CANNOT review something without opinion coming into it. If things were as you wanted it, game reviews would be along the lines of:

The visuals are on a level similar to the most highly rated 10% of contemporary game experiences within the genre. The frame rate is locked at a solid 60fps, while screen tearing is kept to a minimum.

The gameplay mechanics are first person shooter in nature, where the player views the action through the eyes of the protagonist. There are 14 weapons available in the game, from the pistol available at the start through to various additional weapons that can be picked up by walking over them throughout the game experience. Pressing the fire button causes your character to shoot projectiles from their weapon in a manner directly comparable with the firing of similar weapons in real life - however the act of picking items up by walking over them is inherently unrealistic.

The enemies are varied, ranging from unarmoured opponents who take very few bullets to put down to more intelligent, stronger and armour wearing enemies which take longer to kill.

You play through the game by following narrative direction. A character may tell you to go to a certain point to collect an item and bring it back to them. You progress through the game by doing so. You can also explore the various areas if you wish, although this has little bearing on the ultimate outcome of the game.

Technically the game is extremely competent. It didn't crash at all while we played it, and there were few audio or visual issues throughout, although on a number of occasions one character would cut off another mid-sentence, making it difficult to hear what each were saying.

That's what you'd get. You would NEVER have a review saying "this game is great fun", because that's an opinion. Fun differs from person to person. If you got the reviews you wished for, they would ONLY cover technical aspects, never anything about the narrative structure (again, opinion), gameplay beyond mechanics (opinion), level design beyond mechanics (opinion), comparative gameplay to other titles (opinion)

There is no such thing as an objective review when it comes to artwork, and given that games are essentially modern artwork, your entire notion that opinion can be separated from review is beyond nonsensical

COYVB · 06-04-2013 1:32pm

SB2013 wrote: »

Ok perhaps we're getting a little off the point. The lack of any kind of industry standard for a review makes it very hard to distinguish between a mere opinion piece and review

All reviews are opinion pieces, not all opinion pieces are reviews. That's it summed up as succinctly as possible

SB2013 wrote: »

Leaving IGN and Bioshock out of it, do people think early access offers to games compromise a reviewer in any way?

All game journalists (and I am one), get access to games early. That doesn't compromise anything. When an outlet pays for exclusivity on go live date of a review, however, then yes I believe that there's compromisation with regards to needing to pay for the exclusivity agreement through the additional advertising dollars generated through being the first to run a review

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 1:33pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Well that was the last resort... When person says he is doing preview, first look, "opinion" work and then people bashing him, because they take his work as a REVIEW.

I take it as a review aswell but it's a matter of opinion to me.

Not The Real Scarecrow · 06-04-2013 1:34pm

I have to agree with Shadow. A review can be biased by an opinion but the final review should not be a total reflection of the opinion. Its a matter of trying to separate your own opinion from how the game actually plays.
I absolutely hated Assassains Creed 3, for some reason it annoyed me to a point that I could have smashed the **** out of the disk, however if I was reviewing it I would make it clear that I didn't like it for what ever reason but could see why people would like it and the final review score would be mainly based on graphics , mechanics and other aspects of the game that are constant for anyone who plays it. Reviewing a game should be based on the reviewer placing themselves in other players boots and trying to figure out how they might react to the game with out their own opinion coming into too much.
Unfortunately I think a lot of reviews that are out there are solely based on personal opinion and people take their opinions as the word of god. I knew a few people that really liked Aliens CM and if they were to give their opinion disguised as a review for a site, they'd have been cruicified.
As far as Tb goes, he always came across as a twat that thought his own opinion was more important than it actually was and if he's gonna start attacking his followers , I doubt he'll be around for much longer.

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 1:39pm

SB2013 wrote: »

Leaving IGN and Bioshock out of it, do people think early access offers to games compromise a reviewer in any way?

Reviewing an unfinished product can only ever produce a preview and should be treated as such. Early access such as open beta's or pre-release builds which are open the public through payment should be treated as a preview too. After all it's an unfinished product which may not show all of it's glory or ghastliness.

COYVB · 06-04-2013 1:40pm

Just checked out the TotalBiscuit vid in question, and there's absolutely nothing there that suggests it's a review. It's non-critical look at the pre-release game, more "this is what you can do" and "this is how you do x", exceptionally opinion based and very clear about it

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 1:41pm

Meatwad wrote: »

I have to agree with Shadow. A review can be biased by an opinion but the final review should not be a total reflection of the opinion. Its a matter of trying to separate your own opinion from how the game actually plays.
I absolutely hated Assassains Creed 3, for some reason it annoyed me to a point that I could have smashed the **** out of the disk, however if I was reviewing it I would make it clear that I didn't like it for what ever reason but could see why people would like it and the final review score would be mainly based on graphics , mechanics and other aspects of the game that are constant for anyone who plays it. Reviewing a game should be based on the reviewer placing themselves in other players boots and trying to figure out how they might react to the game with out their own opinion coming into too much.
Unfortunately I think a lot of reviews that are out there are solely based on personal opinion and people take their opinions as the word of god. I knew a few people that really liked Aliens CM and if they were to give their opinion disguised as a review for a site, they'd have been cruicified.
As far as Tb goes, he always came across as a twat that thought his own opinion was more important than it actually was and if he's gonna start attacking his followers , I doubt he'll be around for much longer.

Jesus fecking Crist. Finally we getting somewhere, thank you!

If someone does not like him, then fair plays to you, its not some communist country where you are forced to watch TB content. Dont like him, ignore him - DONE.
Though lets call spade a spade here!

COYVB · 06-04-2013 1:43pm

degrassinoel wrote: »

Reviewing an unfinished product can only ever produce a preview and should be treated as such. Early access such as open beta's or pre-release builds which are open the public through payment should be treated as a preview too. After all it's an unfinished product which may not show all of it's glory or ghastliness.

99.999% of reviews are done using finished code. Games are typically finished 3-4 weeks pre-release, often longer. For example, I played a non-finished version of Infinite about 5 weeks pre-launch, but the game was almost finished at that point (the dev I spoke to told me it was minor aesthetic things that were just being tidied up before the master disc was sent to the printer). Now, you certainly wouldn't review that code, however the pre-release disc we received to review it was retail code, ergo it was finished. (retail code does NOT mean it comes in the retail box, on a retail disc, btw)

I think there's a massive misunderstanding among the public as to how a lot of this stuff works tbh

COYVB · 06-04-2013 1:47pm

Meatwad wrote: »

I have to agree with Shadow. A review can be biased by an opinion but the final review should not be a total reflection of the opinion. Its a matter of trying to separate your own opinion from how the game actually plays.

That's all well and good in theory, but that's not how it works in reality. The key thing in your post above is that you say it should not be a TOTAL reflection of the opinion, that i agree with. That's not what Shadow is saying though, he's saying opinion shouldn't come into it.

Opinion has to come into it though, as opinion is where people get their points of reference. You can't really separate them, otherwise a game review becomes nothing more than a technical critique, and games are about so, so much more than that

degrassinoel · 06-04-2013 1:49pm

COYVB wrote: »

99.999% of reviews are done using finished code. Games are typically finished 3-4 weeks pre-release, often longer. For example, I played a non-finished version of Infinite about 5 weeks pre-launch, but the game was almost finished at that point (the dev I spoke to told me it was minor aesthetic things that were just being tidied up before the master disc was sent to the printer). Now, you certainly wouldn't review that code, however the pre-release disc we received to review it was retail code, ergo it was finished. (retail code does NOT mean it comes in the retail box, on a retail disc, btw)

I think there's a massive misunderstanding among the public as to how a lot of this stuff works tbh

believing a developer when he/she tells you, oh it's just a minor aesthetic thing could be disasterous too. Especially if that developer was involved with The WarZ

I'm not involved in the gaming industry, i'm just using my own common sense and applying it to how i believe it should work as a review rather than a preview or firstlook etc..

ShadowHearth · 06-04-2013 1:51pm

COYVB wrote: »

That's all well and good in theory, but that's not how it works in reality. The key thing in your post above is that you say it should not be a TOTAL reflection of the opinion, that i agree with. That's not what Shadow is saying though, he's saying opinion shouldn't come into it.

Opinion has to come into it though, as opinion is where people get their points of reference. You can't really separate them, otherwise a game review becomes nothing more than a technical critique, and games are about so, so much more than that

Right, you know better what i think, then i do myself now. And sure, we live in complete BLACK and WHITE world.

COYVB · 06-04-2013 1:54pm

degrassinoel wrote: »

believing a developer when he/she tells you, oh it's just a minor aesthetic thing could be disasterous too. Especially if that developer was involved with The WarZ

I'm not involved in the gaming industry, i'm just using my own common sense and applying it to how i believe it should work as a review rather than a preview or firstlook etc..

Of course, and that's why I said you'd never review non-retail code. Retail code is for reviewing, because that's the code people are buying, anything before that is for preview only.

I played Splinter Cell: Blacklist in January, and even though the 2 levels I spent my time with were 100% complete at the time, I certainly couldn't use them as the basis of any review, because things can change dramatically in 7 months of development time.

The WTF is SimCity WAS based on retail code, however. It was the very same code everyone in the press had, and that was the very same code that everyone who bought it day 1 got. The code wasn't the issue, it was the servers. The rush too get reviews up for embargo lift means that anything involving servers will never be in any way accurate. That's why I, personally, refuse to review anything that relies on major server side work for at least a week or two post release

Sensitive Biscuit

Comments