PC Gamer Review

Noober · #1 (**permalink**) 07-31-2007, 01:31 AM

I don't normally put too much faith in reviews, but it reminded me too much of Deus Ex, and it is PC Gamer...

Bioshock: 95%

Quote:

Originally Posted by PC Gamer

"I spend my career, and my gaming life, waiting for a moment when a game just astonishes me, when I can't believe what I'm seeing, what I'm doing. Bioshock has five."

"These are the big challenges developers have been struggling to master for decades: narrative, emergence, a sense of place. If another game did just one of these as well as BioShock, it would immediately qualify as a classic. When a game comes along that does all three, we can only be baffled and thankful."

fable · #2 (**permalink**) 07-31-2007, 06:55 AM

I've no faith in PC Gamer. They used to be good, but they sold their souls a good while ago. I know writers who were fired from there because they honestly felt products they'd been handed for review weren't that great, and said so--despite the products being from advertisers.

Noober · #3 (**permalink**) 08-01-2007, 12:03 AM

A fair comment, but I would still maintain that their reviews are far superior to the likes of IGN...

fable · #4 (**permalink**) 08-01-2007, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noober

A fair comment, but I would still maintain that their reviews are far superior to the likes of IGN...

With respect, I'm afraid I don't see why. The PC Gamer staff is largely comprised of what I like to call young puppy dog enthusiasts, who view nearly everything uncritically. As much can be said of IGN, except that at least on IGN, you sometimes hit a good, in depth review. I've yet to find an in depth review in PC Gamer that didn't make me endlessly wince with it's "gee golly this is the best yet!" tone. Marginally, I'd give the palm to IGN, but it would be a tin one.

Ideally, the best way to figure a game's worth in advance is to know your own values, find a reviewer who regularly mirrors these, and read what they write. Or, if you can't do this, go to a compilation meta-site and read a host of reviews on a game. Better still, rent a copy, or look at a friend's copy. There's no substitute for actual gameplay to determine whether you'll really like something.

Noober · #5 (**permalink**) 08-02-2007, 01:14 AM

Well, for a start IGN gave Jade Empire a 9.9...
Admittedly I haven't read a PC Gamer for a number of years , but I seriously doubt that standards have droppped as dramatically (though it does seem about half as thick...) as you claim. Moreover, essentially all you state about PC Gamer can apply IGN but to a greater extent. Overall, I've found PC Gamer reviews (based on Gamerankings etc.) to be more consistantly 'correct' than most internet reviews and in general, more agreeable.

Oh, and just to clarify, the 95% review is from PC Gamer UK, not US (which is quite different).

Additionally, trying to find a reviewer that seemingly shares your opinion tends to be pointless since it is rare that the reviewer gets the opportunity to every game.

fable · #6 (**permalink**) 08-02-2007, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noober

Well, for a start IGN gave Jade Empire a 9.9...
Admittedly I haven't read a PC Gamer for a number of years , but I seriously doubt that standards have droppped as dramatically (though it does seem about half as thick...) as you claim. Moreover, essentially all you state about PC Gamer can apply IGN but to a greater extent.

So, what you're saying, is that we've been discussing comparatives between A and B, and you haven't seen A in a number of years, despite your pushing A as better than B? I really don't know why we're doing this, in that case.

And your subsequent comment about everything I've said to PC Gamer can apply to IGN "but to a greater extent"--how can you tell, as you haven't even read PC Gamer for years? Everybody has a right to their opinion, especially on such a subject that can't be easily quantified; but it helps to have a working knowledge of the subject under discussion.

For myself, I worked for both publications. I wrote for PC Gamer US for about 3 years, and IGN, about 2. Did numerous reviews, several of them of major products. I was also good friends with staff reviewers long before I joined the PC Gamer staff as a freelancer. I still maintain some contacts in both places. This doesn't mean that I can speak ex cathedra about their doings

but it does at least indicate that I know both places, their policies, their people. I'm reasonably up to date.

I'd rather not diss the management of either place, or get into personalities. Suffice to say that I have seen changes in both publications over the years, and despite differences in medium (print, online), I think they walk the same path. I do think PC Gamer was ahead of IGN in dumbing down, however, and sucking up uncritically to the big title companies.

Quote:

Additionally, trying to find a reviewer that seemingly shares your opinion tends to be pointless since it is rare that the reviewer gets the opportunity to every game.

I"m afraid I don't understand this. What do you mean, here?

Noober · #7 (**permalink**) 08-03-2007, 12:43 AM

I of course didn't mean I haven't read anything from PC Gamer for the past few years (I was reading their feature on Starcraft 2 just a few weeks ago!), what I meant is that I haven't read their full magazine for a number of years (just extracts and important features/reviews that I find scanned in various places).

Quote:

I"m afraid I don't understand this. What do you mean, here?

Leaving out crucial words does tend to render things unintelligable

. What I meant is that, for example, one of my preferred reviewers like Daniel Wilks won't be given every game I'm interested in to review. I would have liked, for example, to see a review by him of NWN2.

fable · #8 (**permalink**) 08-03-2007, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noober

I of course didn't mean I haven't read anything from PC Gamer for the past few years (I was reading their feature on Starcraft 2 just a few weeks ago!), what I meant is that I haven't read their full magazine for a number of years (just extracts and important features/reviews that I find scanned in various places).

Whew! Makes me feel much better about our discussion.

But there's no "of course" about it, not with the impossibility of seeing and hearing the person on the other end of the conversation. This is an inherent problem with message boards, and your words led me to take them at face value. No doubt if I knew you personally, I would have realized that shouldn't be the case.

Quote:

Leaving out crucial words does tend to render things unintelligable

. What I meant is that, for example, one of my preferred reviewers like Daniel Wilks won't be given every game I'm interested in to review. I would have liked, for example, to see a review by him of NWN2.

Oh, there's a great deal of minor fighting over the rights to review!

Typically, though, staff writers get first dibs, and in advance management decides how to split the titles. Freelancers like myself were left with the crumbs, unless there was a management in place that knew your work, and appreciated having your byline around. When management switched at IGN, I lost that. But it's how things work. It's a pretty nasty business, in some respects, especially these days, when the only people needed are kids without any critical thinking skills. Makes for much more positive reviews.

Trias12 · #9 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 08:08 PM

I don't put much faith in reviews either.

It seems to me that reviewers are far to prone to turn in to fan boys for major developers. Good examples of this are the reviews for Doom 3 and Half-life 2.

The A.I. in Doom 3 was so dumb it tried to shoot at you through the wall yet there was almost no mention of the weak A.I. in the reviews. The best I saw amounted to a slight slap on the wrist. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this when one "critic" was able to say "we won't tell you what is wrong with it because everything else makes up for it" and get away with it.

Half-Life 2's release was a mess. Valve's mandory use of Steam and their failure to get the word out combined with Steam being far to weak to handle the demand led to one of the worst video game releases ever. Despite all the problems there was almost to mention of it from critcs. As far as I know only Games for Windows magazine actually warned their readers. Once again, fan boys posing as critics gave a high profile title mountains of free advertisements. One magazine, Maximum PC, actually took their 0- 10 scale that they built and swear by and threw it away to give the game an 11.

Before the praise Valve bandwagon roles in answer me this. Would people have been as willing to overlook all of the problems at the end of the day if it was Electronic Arts and one of their games? How about if it was Vivendi, Ubisoft, or Atari? How about if it was anyone other than Blizzard, Valve, or Id? You know as well as I do that things would have gone very differently.

Hey Noober,

Does that review of Bioshock in the U.K. version of P.C. Gamer metion the mandatory activation requirements? No one cared about this with Half-Life 2 and I was wondering if they finally caught on that letting people know about this kind of stuff is fairly important.

DesR85 · #10 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trias12

Half-Life 2's release was a mess. Valve's mandory use of Steam and their failure to get the word out combined with Steam being far to weak to handle the demand led to one of the worst video game releases ever. Despite all the problems there was almost to mention of it from critcs. As far as I know only Games for Windows magazine actually warned their readers. Once again, fan boys posing as critics gave a high profile title mountains of free advertisements. One magazine, Maximum PC, actually took their 0- 10 scale that they built and swear by and threw it away to give the game an 11.

Quite a few online game sites also mentioned this Steam problem as well. I recall Gamespot and G4TV (I think) did mention this as well the last time I read their review.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trias12

Before the praise Valve bandwagon roles in answer me this. Would people have been as willing to overlook all of the problems at the end of the day if it was Electronic Arts and one of their games? How about if it was Vivendi, Ubisoft, or Atari? How about if it was anyone other than Blizzard, Valve, or Id? You know as well as I do that things would have gone very differently.

No. Flaws can be spotted in games (be it a hit or sleeper title). I don't judge games based on how popular or excellent a game developer is. I judge by how good the game is, to be honest. But one thing for sure, people will expect these developers to provide the same quality when it comes to developing future games just as what they did with their previous successful titles.