 |
 |
 |
  |
Well, let's see what's in the letters batch tonight. Well, we've got a letter from someone who hates Wild Arms with all his heart, someone who hates Shadow Madness' battle system, and someone who hates bad reviews. There's the usual smattering of "why doesn't this code work with my copy of FF8 and my PSX" notes, most of which are unanswerable, due to variance in game and system production runs. Someone wrote to me, asking a whole lot of personal questions that I'm not answering. I mean, really, do most of you have the faintest interest in what my turn-ons are? This ain't the Classified ads, you know. There's a line between a public persona and a close friend, and I trust that most of you know better than to pry into my personal life. If not, well, here's a heads-up. :) And lastly, someone took me to task for the gender relations response I wrote yesterday. It's, er, unique. I figured that someone would be upset about it, and tell me that I should be more polite and respectful to letter-writers. What I wasn't expecting was someone telling me that sexism is a solution... but more on that a little later on.
Having not played the demo in question (could someone tell me what the cover date/pic of the OPM this is in?), I can only hope that you're judging the battle system too harshly. I really hope so. Be that as it may, I should point out that a) the battle system will hopefully undergo some revision between the release of the demo and the final product release, and b) if the plot and the rest of the gameplay is good, the battle system will hopefully be a lot less of a pain to deal with. I reserve the right to double back and spit all over Shadow Madness' battle system once I actually play it, though. :) I like to give companies and games the benefit of the doubt, but if I don't like fighting in SM, you'll all hear about it.
I'm not a polite person. It's the way I am, and it shows through in the column day after day. I'm inflammatory, but insist on fair treatment. I made snide remarks, then insist on the rights for people to have differing but equal opinions. I'm quirky and hypocritical and I make no bones about it. That's my charm, such as it is. I agree that I wasn't polite at all after the first paragraph. That was intentional. If you'd simply called me on that, this response would end here. A difference of opinion of what level of politeness was merited is a clear-cut issue. But regarding your middle paragraph, I'll be frank - suggesting that I answer all letters from girls politely on the basis of their gender, as you suggest, is offensive. I will not do that. It's sexual discrimination, pure and simple. I give equal treatment to everyone based on what they say in their letters, not who they are. And that's why I went to town on NekoLeo's letter yesterday. Bottom line, NekoLeo wrote an angry letter to this column, in response to a letter that she evidently didn't read too carefully. Her gender is beside the point. As a result, I took her to task for it. Banishing the boy's club atmosphere of video gaming is something I advocate. But segregating female gamers, by being polite to them where I wouldn't be so with a guy, is not the way to achieve that. That's discrimination. Period.
As we've discussed here in the past, using God as a last boss is less blasphemous than a dramatic tool. I mean, games challenge you, your characters need to overcome some great challenge to win the game, and what's a bigger challenge to defeat than God? Plus, it makes for such obvious lackeys and minor-league opposition; priests with healing magic, angels, etc. No offense to anyone is intended. It's just a game, cliched as that sounds. As for FFMQ, well, you were exactly the target audience they were hunting for, and it seems to have worked out just as they hoped. I found it pretty simplistic and not too memorable, though the battle music kicked serious booty, but I was a snooty, elitist bastard back when I first played it, as opposed to the deeply arrogant elitist bastard I am today, so my opinion of it may change if I play it again. Hmmm...
Most information places it at a September 1999 release, head to head with the Sega Dreamcast launch. They're certainly bold at Square EA, aren't they?
Uhm, sorry? I'd suggest setting your computer to download it during off-peak hours. I'm afraid that as GIA grows, bandwidth troubles will get worse and worse - our server is good, but has its limits. Also, whenever, please take advantage of mirror sites for media, as this also eases the strain on ours, and makes everything peachy keen-o.
|
Sure. Taken from their web page, here's their mailing address.
Square Electronic Arts
P.O. Box 9025
Redwood City, CA
94065-9025
| Reviews text vs. review ratings |
Hey. I had a question, for both you as the Double Agent and as a writer. I recently have been reading a lot of Video Game reviews because I've been more interested in it, and I've been interested in comparing my views with that of various staff and non-staff reviewer for major websites and others. With almost all of their pieces, there seems like one thing that appears over and over, that is, for lack of a better way to describe it, disproportional reviews in correlation to the rating. What I mean by is, for example, I was reading a review of Baldur's Gate, a PC game which I own and have beaten. The writer had a well written piece that proceeded to provide well done arguments as to why the writer felt that the story was lackiing, the Character AI paths were horrendous, the combats were poorly designed, and how the Game failed to have any innovation. I disagreed with it but I thought it was a well done review and expected a score that related. I looked down and he gave it a 9 out of 10. Similar things have happened all over the Internet, and I can't name anything specific but I seem to remember some of this on Gaming Intelligence to a lesser extent. Mostly more on review sites though. The Legend of Zelda game is a fair example if you read reviews written a bit after the release. I only ask because it seems much more prevalent in gaming reviews I have seen than any other subject, and it seems to me like if a reviewer thinks a game is good he should explain not all the bad things in the game but instead why it deserved a 9/10 and some things as to why it didn't get a 10/10. Plus from what I gather you know a thing or two about writing. Thank you for your time. ~-Doc |
Well, whenever you write a review of a game, you have an obligation to analyze the game as fairly as possible, and that means that you need to address both the positive and negative aspects of it. A great review's text will, as you'd prefer, always back up the rating that is assigned; justify it, in short.
The two main traps of review writing are overdoing it, either by totally trashing a game without giving a single compliment, or drowning it in praise while dismissing flaws out of hand. Both give an unbalanced picture of the game, and are unconvincing. Somewhat rarer, but just as annoying, are the ones you describe, which often seem to list off every aspect of the game in an effort to stave off angry responses. They discuss everything so nobody can come up later and say "you wouldn't have given it a 82% if you'd acknowledge how terrible
Writing balanced, fair reviews is very hard. You catch a LOT of flak no matter what you do, no matter how good a review you think you've done. The result is a lot of very paranoid reviews, which are consequently kinda bad. My advice is to read the text first and foremost. That tells you what the game's like, not how the reviewer reacted, and unless it's a reviewer whose views you know you agree with, the content is what's going to make the difference.
| Shooting the breeze |
On my visits to this site and other gaming sites, I have seen manyletters and articles discussing all kinds of hidden issues in RPGgames.. They argue anything from a love triangle between Sephiroth,Tifa, and cloud to hidden advice on who you should marry. These are justexamples but you get the idea.. I cant help but imagine the people whowrote the stories for the games reading these things and going"Whaaaat!?" The people that wrote these things ,while very good atwhat they do, are just people. To hide all the hidden meanings thatpeople have found it the plot would take about as long as it would towrite it.. Analyzing a story can be fun but Im not going to make anylife descisions based on an RPG game... -Trent |
Well, I don't think many people base their life decisions on an RPG's storyline. At least, I hope not. If they do, they have Serious Issues.
As for over-analyzing, well, that's the nature of fandom. Every sort of entertainment has its buffs, and every type has its hyper-intense bunch who analyze them down to their socks and underwear. Trek fandom is the most obvious, but there have been books written about Tolkien, 2001, Xena: Warrior Princess, Superman and the films of Charlie Chaplin, among others, and the intricacies and symbolism they hold. It probably amuses the creators of these game and series to see the levels that are being read into their creations more than anything.
Above all, people do hyper-detailed analyses because they like the subject, and because they enjoy thinking about and extrapolating around them. Whatever floats their boat, says I.
| A bit of vitriol |
Okay, I've got to say it. I bought Wild Arms, "one of the best RPG's on thePlaystation" according to many, and quite frankly...it sucks. It's just aseries of pointless mission-after-mission, totally unoriginal, quests. Imean, it is THE RPG CLICHE! You find your way to a new town, get a mission,fight your way through some sort of dungeon or...you know what I mean, thenfight a boss, go back to the town, pick yourself up, dust yourself off, startall over again! I just got the Sweet Candy (the boat), and I just got REALLYbored. Please tell me the appeal that this retched game has to gamers, andwhat am I missing? Sure, you hard-core RPG freaks out there right now aregoing (in a geeky voice, preferably the voice of the squeaky-voiced kid in theSimpsons),"Look at what this newbie is writing, he cannot thouroughlyappreciate the fine quality in this beautifully imaginative blah blah blahblah blah..." Okay, I am a "newbie" (which is a term I HATE), because myfirst RPG was FFVII, which you "oldies" can't stop bitching about. "Oh, itwas too linear, oh, it wasn't hard enough, oh, blah blah blah blah blah...".....okay, I've gone a little off the topic, but I'm back now. Wild ArmsSUCKS! I'm just sick of the tediousness of the game, and fights occur WAY toooften. Plus, doesn't the Playstation have the capabilites to ditch thosetired, Super Nintendo-looking, short cartoony guy graphics which, by the way,only looked good in Final Fantasy Tactics (I don't know, it just seemed towork in that AMAZING game)? Like I said, I have just gotten the Sweet Candy.Please tell me if I have much more to go. I'm guessing a LONG way to go. Ihope not, cause I want to finish it (just because I like to finish games Ibuy, even crappy ones), but I don't wanna play much more. Also, is it justme, or did FF Tactics rock? Same with Metal Gear Solid (but I over-playedit). And how come none of the gameshark codes I get work on Metal Gear Solid?That sucks, but then again, I am glad I beat the game (twice!) on my own. 11hours alone, 5 hours with the bandanna. And when the hell is FF VIII comingout in the U.S.? And the PocketStation? And whats all this I hear aboutChrono Trigger? Was that any good? Should I buy SNES JUST fot that one game?Whats the word on FF Tactics 2? It's GOTTA happen, it's just GOTTA! Okay,and was Xenogears really that good? Everyone tells me to get it, but it lookstoo cartoony, and I don't wanna fight in giant robots. Really, how is thegame, and the battle system? I know I'm forgetting something, but I don'twanna take up any more of your time. Please post this ranting and raving, asI have spent much of my oh-so valuble time writing it. FFVII ROCKS! ZER016(aka SOLIDUS, the third brother) |
Chrono Trigger is indeed a fantastic game, but there's a ton of reasons to buy an SNES. Final Fantasy 2, FF3, Zelda: Link to the Past... there's a bazillion of great games for it. Get ready for squat character sprites, though - they're everywhere now, and will likely stay a part of the RPG industry for a long time to come, so get used to them; by the by, they've been used very effectively in a lot of older games, and when well-animated, can be just as expressive and cool-looking as anything in FF7 (Legend of Oasis, anyone? Chrono Trigger?) There is no word on FF Tactics 2. And Xenogears is excellent, though you should avoid it if you don't like fighting in giant robots, since it involves a lot of that.
As for Wild Arms, well, it's not to everyone's tastes. I thought it was too long, and some of the puzzles become downright tedious after a while. Given your reaction to it, I'd suggest staying the hell away from the Dragon Quest or Lufia games. The appeal of Wild Arms generally seems to rely on three main factors. First, a lot of people (myself included) enjoy the music quite a bit. Second, the plot is lengthy and detailed, with a smattering of some neat characters (Calamity Jane!). Third, and most important, Wild Arms is solid like a rock in every way. There's lots of secrets and hidden items, lots of dungeons to explore and puzzles to solve, a mountain of bosses to kill, and it's all quite playable. It's all substance. That seems to be the core of its appeal. It's all gameplay.
Closing comments
~Person asked if we could add a Codes section to GIA. Well, it's a thought, but how about we just be more diligent about amassing codes for the various game coverage sections we have now? Would that work?
Cham wants to know if we're gonna review FF8. Hell yeah. He asks if it can be spoiler-free. I assume that our review will have minor plot and gameplay spoilers, but if it gets deeply spoilerific, it'll be marked as such.
And that should do it for another day. See you all tomorrow.
- The Double Agent
 |  |  | ||||
|
| | | |||
 | |  | ||||
| ||||||