This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.
Why do reviewers refuse to talk about the actual gameplay mechanics ever
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.
Then you buy said phone all excited only to see the OS/GUI/UX is a sloppy, janky disaster with framerate drops and stutters and hangups. Hardware doesn't matter yet every tech reviewer does exactly what I exaggerated above.
I know what the TC means. There are usually not a lot in terms of explaining specifics when it comes to mechanics and such. Like a reviewer won't point out if you are able to rebind controls and things like that. Just very specific things.
Why I mainly stick with ACG reviews. I really like Karak's format and he does a good job of covering all aspects of a game in detail.
One thing I found weird about the PC board is that they for some reason dislike TB despite the fact that:-
a) he is one of the only legit PC-centric YouTubers(most others tend to review games for other consoles. I've yet to see TB do for one that wasnt available on PC)
b) for all poster's talk about which hardware does what better, how to game @1440p 60FPS, alot of people complain when TB actually talks about the ONE thing that WILL help games run at 60FPS and that is the damn settings. Pretty telling to tell who the actual PC-gamers and the console gamers are, as the later will not be interested in what graphical settings a game has and can achieve.
Action speaks louder than words. But words, when used right, overwhelm any action - Me, 2006
Let's put a smile on that face - The Joker, 2008
This is something that always has annoyed me, too, TC. Reviewers generally talk about the content in a game, the visuals, the story, and maybe the polish. But what can make or break games is how it feels, which seems never (or rarely) touched on. PGR2 was an awesome racing game because the driving mechanics felt so solid and satisfying, easy to start but with a high ceiling. Counter-Strike remains attractive 18 years later because the control feels so crisp and tight, whereas its remake CSS always felt kind of loose to me. GTA IV's incredible blending of animation and physics also gave that game a lot of life after its story and graphics got old. I wish these game-defining mechanics had a much bigger focus in reviews. You only really get it from random user videos which is one reason I don't bother reading official reviews anymore.
whichmultiplat.com, my current project
discussions on the best release of each game
Lugoves posted...Why I mainly stick with ACG reviews. I really like Karak's format and he does a good job of covering all aspects of a game in detail.
I agree. when he goes over a game I'm interested, I usually watch the entire video. Because that is the information I am looking for, controls, binds, settings....etc.
Chaos_Missile posted...Lugoves posted...Why I mainly stick with ACG reviews. I really like Karak's format and he does a good job of covering all aspects of a game in detail.
I like TB but I don't need to hear 20 minutes explaining what each setting does. I've been around PCs and gaming long enough to know what shadows are. I do like knowing if you can change the bindings, etc. I just don't need that verbose of an explaination on each graphic setting and what they are on each video.
If I run into issues getting a game to run smoothly then sure I'll go back and watch that setting section to pick up on any tips to improve performance.
My Collection: http://www.gamefaqs.com/users/LUGOVES/games/owned?platform=0
I like TB but I don't need to hear 20 minutes explaining what each setting does.
Doesn't he put a timestamp to jump to the actual review of the game skipping settings? Also, I don't think he explains what each setting does in detail but rather goes over what settings are available.
We do what we must / because we can. / For the good of all of us. / Except the ones who are dead.
If the gameplay mechanics need discussing it's generally one of two categories. Either they do something clever/new or they suck ass. Otherwise one just assumes they're about par for whatever genre they're part of or evident from watching gameplay videos.
Even I'm not crazy enough to believe that distortion of reality
Because it's hard to explain game feel and deep dives on game mechanics in your typical game review. Most reviews will usually remark on if the controls don't feel right or if there are glaring issues with game mechanics, but it's kind of hard to explain why a game like Dark Souls feels good mechanically whereas something like Lords of the Fallen doesn't. Especially for publications like game reviews where people most often just want to hear "What's good, what's bad, what's the score out of 10?"
MSI Z97| Intel i5-4690 @ 3.5 Ghz | 8GB Cosair Vengence @ 1600 |Radeon R9 390 8GB
Who gave you permission to talk to me, mongrel?
Talking about Gameplay Mechanics requires some knowledge. Say the wrong thing and you get made to look like a fool. But if all you talk about is how pretty the game is, you're safe. Most game reviewers have zero credentials for that sort of thing...their resume is "i've been playing games since the PS1 days" and maybe "I went to college and got a degree", and that's about it. It's only somewhat recently (in the last 10 years) that there have even been classes about games.
Pretty much this. On a game mechanic side, it'd be nice to see the reviews breakdown that things like Mass Effect Andromeda (the cover system), can feel a little simplified as it auto-locks to cover. Also, selecting weapons is a little more convoluted that simply D-pad (on PC, which has been allocated to giving commands). Give me back my command wheel. That being said, I'm actually not finding Andromeda that bad for all the complaints it got. Storywise is fine, the quirky visuals do throw you off (even post PC patch).
I do agree with the TC though that game mechanics should be talked about 'far more', but that would require some of these reviewers actually being hardcore gamers rather than just journalists. Might be an idea to make them post their achievement/trophy name for each article they write (not their personal one, but one for the job), to help us see if they are legit gamers are just admirers of pretty visuals.
I am the instrument of providence, she will use me as long as I accomplish her designs, then...she will break me like a glass.
Add user to Ignore List after reporting