What happened to it being a review of the video game Splatoon?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Splatoon | Review Thread
- Thread starter James Scott
- Start date
What happened to it being a review of the video game Splatoon?
That review would be considered incredibly stupid and uninformed. However, even with that level of stupidity, it still cannot be considered 'objectively wrong' by the very definition of the word. Quality may be objective BUT the criteria of what makes a quality product IS indeed subjective.
Let me explain to you what objectivity is as simple as possible.
Apples tastes like crap. Subjective opinion.
An apple is a fruit. Objective fact.
The game may be broken in his eyes which is why we cannot say that that person is objectively wrong.
I don't think he has heard the concept of writing for your audience.
Baron von Loathsome
Member
Fair enough. It's reviewing well overall, however, in spite of that lack of content. An approximate 80 on Metacritic is in line with my expectations for this game, and that's pretty good for an "incomplete" game.
That is my last word in this debate.
test_account
XP-39C²
Well, sure, but i dont think that the reviewer ment is a definitive/objective statement. I'm sure that he/she only talked about their experience with it. If it was ment as a definitive statement, then it would be objectively wrong indeed. I felt that its more like me saying something like "wine doesnt taste good", and then i would only be talking about my opinion about itWell, what I'm arguing is that it's not SUBJECTIVELY wrong. Objectively, it is
Sure, i'm just saying in this discussion that its not wrong to say that its "impossible" to aim with motion controls if the reviewer is only talking about his/her experience with the game. I'm not blaming anyone
Splatoon has the choice, so its the best of two worlds, indeed.The average person buying amiibos are not buying them for what they can unlock in games.
Amiibos have turned into a collectors item, with people going crazy over the more rare ones.
On the contrary I think as thing stand even if amiibos didn't unlock anything in games they would still sell.
Well the first part of the sentence you provided wouldn't be objectively wrong. The 2nd part is by default taken to be his personal experience (and going by Uncharted 3 a very plausible one). It wouldn't really need a qualifier for him to say, "for me", unless the controls were straight out broken.
His review would be garbage though.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Another example: It's impossible to aim as fast with the motion-controls as with the joystick in Splatoon.
Objectively wrong.
I'm going to keep waiting to hear from the people that I usually trust to review stuff to post. Most of the reviews so far are by editors that I have no interest in listening to or I've never heard of them. That said, I'm 99% sure that regardless of reviews, this isn't going to be a game I'll enjoy. Not surprised at all it is reviewing this high, though. Only Nintendo game in the last several years to review poorly was NintendoLand, which still wasn't that bad (mid 70s on Metacritic). As we've seen though, high review scores =/= great sales and a sequel.
Wowfunhappy
Member
I really appreciate what they're trying to do—they're just not doing it well.
For this particular review, at least, I think Paste Magazine actually used a similar writing style but pulled it off really well.
It was presented as an opinion, not a fact so I see no problems there.
WrenchNinja
Member
Is there really no off tv play?
What? Are you kidding?
This a fully fleshed out single player akin to Mario Galaxy.
Which reviews said it was take it or leave it?
Like Arcade mode streetfighter? I think you have no clue as to what the singleplayer is.
He talks about, says it's a game that defies description, and that it plays well. It's a kids shooter about spraying the ground, and it doesn't have technical issues so not much to write about. The bulk of the article is pretty much a mirror pointed at would be detractors who demand "more" from a gametype they've never actually played before. That saying Splatoon is just a shooter undersells it, and that this reviewer along with every other viewer, and all of us, will somehow have to filter our inherent vices to give it an honest score.
He did give it an 82.
If they said they'd roll out additional maps within weeks, not too bad of a backlash I think. Problem usually is with a low number of maps that we have to wait months for DLC packs. That is not the case here.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
It was presented as a fact, in stark contrast to most of the surrounding bulletpoints which are presented as opinions
Ive seem reviewers call design decision bugs and say the game was broken due to that before. I consider those kind of statements to be objectively wrong.
I think this depends on the kind of statement said and the context.
Since you use the pad as a map/transport to your teammates it doesn't work.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Nope and that sucks.
Hopefully, down the road, it will be available for at least the singleplayer.
Papacheeks
Banned
Oh, I agree, quality wise it looks fun as hell. The use of color, and design of the character's feels fresh which to me Nintendo has strongly needed.
No it wasn't. If you want to think so then sure but it bloody well isn't to me.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Impossible is not a subjective term
No, but you can start playing it now (or rather, friday) and not have to wait until later.
Part of the price could be considered to be a "pre order" of the upcoming content. If that does not bother you, go ahead and buy it. Otherwise, see you in 4 months.
And the English language isn't as rigid as you think. That could very well be a figure of speech.
Vital Tundra
Member
It very much can be used in a subjective manner.
"It's impossible for me to hit that apple" can mean "It's very hard for me to hit that apple". Go check any number of dictionary websites.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Such ambiguities shouldn't be in a review.
But I disagree there's anything ambiguous about it.
Of course it can; I didn't say otherwise. The meaning of the word didn't change in that context, and is not how the reviewer used it
TheOohChild
Member
mmmm, it's getting kinda hype in here
I honestly expected the game to get lower scores solely based on the fact that it's being released in an incomplete state (even if Nintendo has announced free patches) and because of the usual Nintendo-isms when it comes to online multiplayer games. Pretty amazing scores really, imagine if Nintendo actually released the game in its full state right off the bat.
alfredofroylan
Member
That Escapist link is not working
Papacheeks
Banned
It was talked about in the EGM NOW review, in-term of comparison. I watched 30-40 minutes from single player, your statement is complete opinion. It has bigger area's with some small puzzles and boss battles. Chris Carter from Destructoid notes they feel similar to 3D mario game, but in no way does he say it's as good as Super mario galaxy.It more or less helps you think on your feet in terms of how to change back and forth from kid to squid and when to use it. It's a good warm up, but not in the same vein as 3D WORLD or Mario Galaxy in the slightest.
If it was that good, it wouldn't be sitting at 81 on metacritic.
That's just you being pedantic but whatever. This isn't going anywhere.
Truth is, when we read a review, we want to know whats the game about, so we assume a lot of thing being stated there to be facts. Of course, things such as "I dont like blue" are obviously opinion, But when a reviewer changes the tone from "I had a hard time doing this" to "Its impossible doing this", in the context, and in the eyes of the reader, hes not expressing his opinions, but facts.
Let me give you an example:
Reviewer A says "I've had a hard time passing through any part of the last of us without alerting enemies"
Reviewer B says: "Its impossible to pass through any part of the game without alerting enemies, stealth doesnt works".
When people read Reviewer B statement its painfully obvious he is saying that as a fact.
People like to argue that reviews are 100% opinion. They are not. How much a person liked the game? Sure thats an opinion. But every review has to give factual information about the game they are talking about.
Pah, only a 10? If the reviewer had really liked it they'd have made an Inkling Person of the Year.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
The reviewer successfully showed how to write proper subjective statements elsewhere, but didn't similarly qualify that portion and literally stated it was impossible to use as quickly.
Call it what you want, but it's misleading at best
Edit: Meaty above gets it
test_account
XP-39C²
Gamereactor.no: 7/10
+ Unique and fresh concept, filled with action and colorful fun.
- Single player not being rewarding enough. Launches with few multiplayer modes. The controls feels clumsy to learn.
http://www.gamereactor.no/anmeldelser/319324/Splatoon/?sid=2b68b12ee7efe661eb5de64b617471e1
+ Unique and fresh concept, filled with action and colorful fun.
- Single player not being rewarding enough. Launches with few multiplayer modes. The controls feels clumsy to learn.
http://www.gamereactor.no/anmeldelser/319324/Splatoon/?sid=2b68b12ee7efe661eb5de64b617471e1
The way the reviewer used impossible can easily be interpreted to be mean very hard.
There is very very little factual information in most reviews. A fact would be "The game runs at 720p" or "The game uses X form of AA". In short something like a Digital Foundry article. Most reviews are comprised of personal opinions based on a reviewer's experience and background knowledge.
Somewhere, somehow, Jim Sterling sheds a silent tear.
Neff
Member
The solo mode isn't quuuiiiiite that good. It's nowhere near as long, or ambitious, or as imaginative as SMG.
But it is really good. Anyone writing it off it as a trivial afterthought would be way off base.
Dash Kappei
Not actually that important
I gave the game 8.2* on IGN Italia
The good:
Fresh and unique take on the TPS genre
Excellent and deep gameplay
Tight controls
Cool maps
Stellar art direction
Great soundtrack
Solid netcode
Surprisingly entertaining single player campaign
Interesting free DLC plan
The bad:
Lack of content at launch (only 5 maps, 2 online game modes)
Dojo mode stuck at 30 fps (the difference from the 60 fps of the other modes is pretty significant)
Surreal and archaic online structure: no voice chat, no private matches at launch, impossibility to change weapons and gear between matches without going back to the lobby, no custom loadouts, no challanges/ in game achievements/stats
Overall, i really really loved it and i honestly would have given it a much higher score (like 9+) if the online wasn't so inexcusably stuck in 2005.
If you guys have questions, feel free to ask!
*Please note that the score will be updated in the upcoming months with the release of the free new content that Nintendo announced a few weeks ago.
Great and honest review, well done mate
CarlieCaplin
Member
Since you're quoting one review...
Latest IGN-NVC
Gamexplain review
Two videos that show people who played the SP campaign being really positive about it. One even compares it to Galaxy.
Uhh...why?
I didn't mean it was as good but in structure and you can tell the Nintendo made both games.
The blasting off from place to place
The bosses
Fantastical
Death Prophet
If single player is great I will be extremely pleased.