This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

  • Post New Message
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. How on earth did ign give this a 9.3?

User Info: digidevilwil

digidevilwil
2 days ago#201
McLahey posted...
digidevilwil posted...
Because taking a video game seriously doesn't mean breaking down every microscopic element and trying to shame the game for it when it doesn't generally affect the greater objective of a video game. If that was the case reviews would be like 30-60 minutes long. It means they are able to play the game and construct their thoughts on it into a coherent and presentable manner for people to utilize as an impression of the games potential fun factor.

Once again, the majority of gamers do not care about all the technical jargon, and the people who do care about it, don't really need or care about reviewers in the first place, right?
This attitude leads to nothing but more and more flaws being swept under the rug to make half-baked products appealing to the masses, and contributes to the devaluation of video games as an art form subject to the same scrutiny as any other medium.

If people whose entire job it is to review games aren't actually reviewing them and just putting out articles that say, "It's fun, buy it!" then who is addressing the problems? At that point you might as well just watch a commercial for the game, because reviews like this one are nothing more than glorified advertisements.


@McLahey

And here we keep going down the same tree. Your idea of a flaw, and others idea of a flaw is completely different, because the actual objective of a video game is to be fun. Also not all art follows rigid "proper" logical rules. Often some of the greatest art ends up being flawed on a fundamental logical level, but what it conveys greatly surpasses any form of critical judgement one might bring on it.

Should games have more objective quality design? Of course they should, but if you bound your mind to things being objectively proper rather than are you actually having fun, then you're not really playing video games with the same expectations as the vast majority. There are plenty of objectively high quality games, but that doesn't necessarily translate to them being "fun" games for people.
Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/user/swillo
Twitter - @PandaKingEX, 3rd Place at EVO for Pokken Tournament.

User Info: Koola1

Koola1
2 days ago#202
ChibiRidley posted...
Video game reviews are not objective and are not supposed to be objective.

If you truly believe this to be true, answer this for me please.

Why do reviewers type out entire paragraphs about games? If the goal is to only provide subjective views on a specific title, why hasn't every review been boiled down to "it's fun, buy it." and "it's not fun, don't buy it."

After all, information about how the game plays, quality of the story and voice acting if available, insight into the mechanics aren't required with your line of thought. Why don't reviews simply say "the controls are good, i like the story, and it plays good." instead of providing objective statements about how all of that functions and how they compliment each other in the context of the game itself?

User Info: Apocalypso

Apocalypso
2 days ago#203
Koola1 posted...
If you truly believe this to be true, answer this for me please.

Why do reviewers type out entire paragraphs about games? If the goal is to only provide subjective views on a specific title, why hasn't every review been boiled down to "it's fun, buy it." and "it's not fun, don't buy it."

After all, information about how the game plays, quality of the story and voice acting if available, insight into the mechanics aren't required with your line of thought. Why don't reviews simply say "the controls are good, i like the story, and it plays good." instead of providing objective statements about how all of that functions and how they compliment each other in the context of the game itself?
At the end of the day, the reviewer is giving his/her own opinion. It's subjective. The whole point is for you to get an idea of what the reviewer experienced and then form your own opinion. If the reviewer said, "Even though traditional wild encounters are gone, I still had a blast capturing wild pokèmon by just tossing pokèballs," I would immediately know that that's something I wouldn't enjoy despite the reviewer enjoying it. That's one of the reasons I didn't bother with LGPE.
I got 99 problems but dexit ain't one.

User Info: ai123

ai123
2 days ago#204
Opinions cannot be objective by definition.

Opinions can and should, however, be supported through reference to the subject. The reasons a reviewer hold them can be explained. A review that says 'the gameplay is fun' is clearly inadequate. One which details aspects of the gameplay and addresses why the review likes them is much more useful and illuminating.

But it still doesn't provide an objective truth.
'The sprites is ridiculous polygons'
(edited 2 days ago)

User Info: Contracts

Contracts
2 days ago#205
Apocalypso posted...
That's one of the reasons I didn't bother with LGPE.

As a breeder, I'm tempted to get LGP just for the perfect pikachu with its two egg groups...
I offer contracts. You get a wish. And other stuff! Apply now!
*Contracts now feature NDA's. No termination clauses*

User Info: Koola1

Koola1
2 days ago#206
In fact, I'll do you one better.

If reviews are not meant to be objective in any way, why bother defending their review with an hour-long podcast?

It's a subjective take, right? There's no reason or need to defend a subjective take on a game. You like it, and that's that. Why bother trying to say "There are no glaring flaws in Pokemon Sword/Shield" to defend your entirely subjective opinion of Pokemon Sword/Shield?
Contracts posted...
Gravis_Mortorum posted...
It’s funny how hard people are still trying to bash a game that has already proven to be a huge success

By this metric, Suicide Squad was a good movie and the The Hobbit trilogy is just as good as the Lord of the Rings, if not a bit better.

Stupid logic is stupid.
Bad reviews in general for both the bad things you mentioned. And folk hate the Hobbit movies. Nice try though.
aryanbrar posted...
Gravis_Mortorum posted...
It’s funny how hard people are still trying to bash a game that has already proven to be a huge success and an obvious step forward for the franchise. Sad.


is cod a good game because it sells well??
answer that question

Did it get overall good reviews?

User Info: kollie89

kollie89
2 days ago#209
Gravis_Mortorum posted...
obvious step forward for the franchise.

Citation needed
https://twitter.com/ScrubQuotesX/status/1192803964686749696

User Info: SenorGauntlet

SenorGauntlet
2 days ago#210
PkmTrainerAbram posted...
SenorGauntlet posted...
lmao it’s just your credit card number, you don’t own numbers
like money isn’t even real man


Glad to hear that you're broadcasting not to take you seriously. Not that I was, but I'm sure someone will take the s*** covered bait so I'll point it out.

SenorGauntlet posted...
I have a paid Spotify subscription like literally everyone else, I’ve never read a comic or watched an anime in my life besides Spirited Away (owned), and I legally own all of my games. This is normal.


Press x to doubt.


How far removed from society are you that a $10/month service that’s demonstrably superior time mp3s and physical media in every way isn’t the norm, and watching chinese cartoons as an adult is?
strike a pose
http://i.imgur.com/logkNxA.gif
(edited 2 days ago)
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. How on earth did ign give this a 9.3?
  • Post New Message

GameFAQs Answers