Famitsu still reputable?

[Nosauz]

^meh, you said it, this goes for anything, being naive and blindly accepting a number is the problem, its the mentality that we don't think for ourselves that leads to shit products. If they can get away with it they'll continue to do it, but the one thing that makes us humans better than any animal, is to question everything, I know this a really cynical view of the world, but first hand expierence is better than anything, and if you don't have first hand expierence don't just take one source, take multiple source to build the image of the game and to see it, because each person is different so each opinion is different. If you ask a board game player/ ccg/ rts/rpg player if reptition is boring, their answers will vary dramatically compared to a fps player. Questioning the reasoning behind the review, and questioning the score is better than just accepting it, a score is just the impression of the game, nothing more nothing less. I use to frequent 1up, till recently they dropped everyone, but I went not for the score but the opinions of people who tastes similar to mine, so it made choosing games not as difficult and I could get a perspective different from the preconcieved notion in my head, did I only use 1up, no, I used ign, message boards, and even the game websites to get better idea of the situation. So famitsu is no where near outdated, it offers great articles, cool lists, and usually pretty awesome collectors stuff. Plus naturally I take most reviews with a grain of salt, though some of them are quite comedic. This is the reason why we have metacritic. Metacritic lets you aggreagate all the reviews and makes finding the information easier, its better to keep yourself informed, and if you enjoy the writing of famitsu why stop reading it.

[TrueKnight]

Reviewers (legit ones) essentially only gives reccomendations, insight on the products, but in the end it's up to us (the consumers) to buy it or not.

In some cases scores doesn't mean shit. Examples: we know FF Dirge of Cerberus overall sucks and reviewers gave it a crappy score, but still it sells because of the "ff" brand. Western reviewers gave Lost Remnant average till shitty scores but being an avid jrpg gamer like I am, and the Squeenix franchise, I still went ahead and buy it, and enjoyed it for the gameplay and quests. We know overall Star Wars the Force Unleashed sucks and reviewers gave it overall average score, but still ppl buy it and it becomes a hit because hey, it's 'star wars'.

Sometimes it's the brand and franchise that matters lol.

[Shadow Kira01]

Originally Posted by TrueKnight

Reviewers (legit ones) essentially only gives reccomendations, insight on the products, but in the end it's up to us (the consumers) to buy it or not.

In some cases scores doesn't mean shit. Examples: we know FF Dirge of Cerberus overall sucks and reviewers gave it a crappy score, but still it sells because of the "ff" brand. Western reviewers gave Lost Remnant average till shitty scores but being an avid jrpg gamer like I am, and the Squeenix franchise, I still went ahead and buy it, and enjoyed it for the gameplay and quests. We know overall Star Wars the Force Unleashed sucks and reviewers gave it overall average score, but still ppl buy it and it becomes a hit because hey, it's 'star wars'.

Sometimes it's the brand and franchise that matters lol.

Dirge of Cerberus isn't that bad. Well... The stage where you play briefly as Cait Sith was extremely difficult, other that.. It was pretty good in terms of story, gameplay, and graphics.

[Duo Maxwell]

Originally Posted by Shadow Minato

Dirge of Cerberus isn't that bad. Well... The stage where you play briefly as Cait Sith was extremely difficult, other that.. It was pretty good in terms of story, gameplay, and graphics.

The Japanese version is bad, very bad, in case you didn't know.

[Benoit]

Something to consider: in newspapers, the ads aren't being paid by the people who are being reported in the news. Well, unless something specific happened at a certain company, but it's not the focus. But in video game magazines, all ads are being paid by the industry players themselves.

Conflict of interest, anyone? Don't talk like it's only suspected that it is like this, because it really is. The most recent example was the debacle at GameSpot about a year back.

[-Kh-]

ITT: OP is bitter because both Nintendogs and final Fantasy XII got 40/40



tl;dr: trolling Famitsu in an anime-centric forum, go back to Gamefags.

[TrueKnight]

Originally Posted by -kh-

tl;dr: trolling Famitsu in an anime-centric forum, go back to Gamefags.

And may I ask why he should go back to Gamefaqs? Not all anime-centric forums considers Famitsu as their gospel for picking up titles, like this thread for example if you bother reading it from the start.

[kujoe]

Originally Posted by -Kh-

tl;dr: trolling Famitsu in an anime-centric forum, go back to Gamefags.

Animesuki does have a Games section, you know.

This thread isn't out of place.

[Sides]

Originally Posted by TrueKnight

Reviewers (legit ones) essentially only gives reccomendations, insight on the products, but in the end it's up to us (the consumers) to buy it or not.

Exactly. That is the whole point of being a journalist is to give people information about an issue or a product. Reviews are ok, although i don't like them. But to give numberical scores at the end of a review can be misleading, since some people won't bother to read the whole article, and rely on the scoring, and probably some short bulletins, to consider a purchase. I blame it on peoples stupidity.
I'm not sure if capcom did it every where, but in the UK they gave normal people the chance to play SFIV(arcarde version) and BH5 in some events, and i think more devs and publisher should do it, rather relying on reviwers to sell their product.

Dirge of Cerberus, jpn release, wasn't that bad if i can remember correctly. The single modus was average, but the online part was kind of fun, until they shut down the server.

Sorry man, TrueKnight, didn't read your post on page 2, too long for me to read ^^.

[Shadow Kira01]

Originally Posted by Sides

Exactly. That is the whole point of being a journalist is to give people information about an issue or a product. Reviews are ok, although i don't like them. But to give numberical scores at the end of a review can be misleading, since some people won't bother to read the whole article, and rely on the scoring, and probably some short bulletins, to consider a purchase. I blame it on peoples stupidity.

You can't blame the game review scores if people are too lazy to read the entire article. If people are interested in a game enough to make a purchase, I think it is only logical that they would spend a few minutes of their time to read the entire review rather than just half a second to look at the score only.

The reason why a numerical score (or an alphabetical score) is required because there are awards given to the best game every year by most, if not all of the game reviewers. If the game reviewers just write a game review without a score, then the awards at the end of the year would become unnecessary or out of place.

Also that these "awards" tend to encourage more gamers to try out the game in which case that more people are glad that they didn't miss out on a good game and not mentioning that the game company of the awarded game will also earn more profit if more copies of a game is sold. In other words, it is a triple win process!

[-Kh-]

Originally Posted by kujoe

Animesuki does have a Games section, you know.

This thread isn't out of place.

Yeah, I know, I used to post on this section, until I realized I was just wasting my time talking about games here and moved on to other sections only

[Shinoto]

I tend to ignore their FF and DQ scores, They normally are inflated.
I also do enjoy thier attempts at rating Western games also...Its like...Well Its a FPS, but we quite don't understand it. So lets give it a 34. Next one gets the same score but was drastically better game.

[TrueKnight]

Originally Posted by Sides

I'm not sure if capcom did it every where, but in the UK they gave normal people the chance to play SFIV(arcarde version) and BH5 in some events, and i think more devs and publisher should do it, rather relying on reviwers to sell their product.

Because the reviewers and gaming magazines have what the developers and publishers don't, (i) the time; (ii) the most important one, exposure, which will eventually lead to (iii) strategic marketing.

Gaming already achieved global exposure in terms of profit and a considerable market share in the entertainment industry.

Developers and publishers alike don’t have luxury for time and couldn’t afford to allocate funding just on the marketing department in order to market their product to ALL audiences in the world. Instead, for developers they allocate them in their R&D and software on the product, while for publishers they would better off allocate them in the productions and operational department in order to distribute the product.

So how do they actually reach the people/audiences who represent their market as many as possible? By exposing their product first to the media, consisting the reviewers/news/magazines and voila, global exposures to the world with minimize costs.

What Capcom did with SFIV and RE5 like you said is one of many ways in the public relations or marketing strategy to reach the local audience and spread them with word by word, however, this strategy will only give minimum impact on the overall market. Which in the end, would affect their profit.

In the end, worldwide exposure through the media is the most viable choice in terms of costs, it basically let the system do it for you in a much larger scale.

[meh]

Originally Posted by Shadow Minato

You can't blame the game review scores if people are too lazy to read the entire article. If people are interested in a game enough to make a purchase, I think it is only logical that they would spend a few minutes of their time to read the entire review rather than just half a second to look at the score only.

Perhaps it's just because I'm poor relative to others here, but I always found the 50-60 bucks for a game to be quite a significant investment. And something I cannot afford to really waste. So I cannot understand people who buy games just on scores.

Unless it's a "brand name" game that I'll buy regardless of the score(FF numbered games, Madden, etc.), I always make sure to put in a lot of time into making sure I'll like the game.

It's not like I can just get my money back if the game sucks.

[Shadow Kira01]

Originally Posted by meh

Perhaps it's just because I'm poor relative to others here, but I always found the 50-60 bucks for a game to be quite a significant investment. And something I cannot afford to really waste. So I cannot understand people who buy games just on scores.

Unless it's a "brand name" game that I'll buy regardless of the score(FF numbered games, Madden, etc.), I always make sure to put in a lot of time into making sure I'll like the game.

It's not like I can just get my money back if the game sucks.

Its not just you. I am sure most people wouldn't spend 50-60 bucks on a game just based on a score. Personally, I hesitate to spend more than 50 bucks on used games, especially when new release games cost about 40-50 bucks.

Although I like the Final Fantasy series, I did not buy all of its games. I don't see the point of buying all the remakes for the nes/snes games just to see a few added anime cutscenes when the gameplay isn't improved much.

There are many times when I bought a game based on the package to find that it is actually horrible but that can't be helped. Nowadays, I only buy the games I am looking for. Currently, there are only about 14 games left for my ps2 and I don't see any of them in most stores.

[Duo Maxwell]

Originally Posted by meh

Unless it's a "brand name" game that I'll buy regardless of the score(FF numbered games, Madden, etc.), I always make sure to put in a lot of time into making sure I'll like the game.

We have gaming board, review and demo for that purpose, don't we?
I can understand your "brand name" reason, but I still think it's better to have some knowledge about the game (based on 3 things I mentioned above) before making a decision.

[Nosauz]

the problem about demos, is that they lack features that we crazy, their short, and most of the time they only are produced to hide other serious flaws of a game, which naturally is worse than a review thats biased, because a demo is what the game creators want you to envisualize what the game expeirence will be, its their perfect slice of game meant to market the entire game to you, so generally demos are more misrepresentation by the actual game makers.

[Duo Maxwell]

That's why I include all 3 of them. You can't understand one game just by experience one of the 3 I mentioned above.

Hell, I wouldn't know how good Valkyrie Chronicle is if I just played the demo.

[meh]

Originally Posted by Shadow Minato

Although I like the Final Fantasy series, I did not buy all of its games. I don't see the point of buying all the remakes for the nes/snes games just to see a few added anime cutscenes when the gameplay isn't improved much.

Do people find remakes to be "numbered FFs"? I thought it was a term to denote the main ones, FF1-10, 12, and hopefully sometime soon, 13. I started at FF7, and bought FF8, 9, 10, and 12 basically not caring about reviews. Same with Madden, which I tend to update every other year.

Originally Posted by Duo Maxwell

We have gaming board, review and demo for that purpose, don't we?
I can understand your "brand name" reason, but I still think it's better to have some knowledge about the game (based on 3 things I mentioned above) before making a decision.

Perhaps you should've read the rest of my post? I don't think I'm disagreeing with you on anything.

[Duo Maxwell]

Originally Posted by meh

Perhaps you should've read the rest of my post? I don't think I'm disagreeing with you on anything.

Did I sound as I was disagreeing with you? If I was, sorry.