GameInformer

So I received the new game informer in the mail. I opened up (As always) to the reader comments. One comment really got to me.

Basically a kid was going on about how if the same game came out for the wii it was instantly bad. And "nintendo power" was better

First no. Nintendo power is not better.

Second here are my thoughts:

Nintendo is like sega was (or used to be). They make their own games and systems. I used to be a hardcore nintendo fanatic. But they failed me with the wii. If you ever played call of duty 5 for the wii (which you probably couldnt dream of) you'd know it would suck. Basically the gun isn't really in the game once you think about it, it's kind of like they took a picture of it and made it move around. The graphics are awful (not that graphics matter but i like to see peoples eyes move before i shoot them in the face), they tookout about 3 or 4 of the original maps and don't have map packs, and I really do feel bad for the sad souls playing that game thinking its of xbox or ps3 standards.  So basically the other companies dont want to work on whole different controls and graphics for the wii . Unless they're bored and need a new title (Much like modern warfare reflex edition). Sure the wii is an ok system but if you're looking for some hardcore games you should probably go with the other systems.

Uh... this is so heavily flawed that I'm not even sure where to begin.

COD:WaW was (not called COD5 either, sorry to break it to you) by no means bad. I enjoyed it until the hackers came a long and Treyarch never fixed it.

Quite obviously the Wii's graphics aren't that great. We reached that conclusion... God, uh... 3 years ago? 4 years ago?

I haven't ever seen someone's eyes really "move" in any model of an NPC/Player ever. Moving eyes is pretty difficult to do without being in a cut-scene or scripted movement.

They did not take out any of the original maps. The map pack maps just were not included. Also, there were no vehicles in the WaW on the Wii, hence why the shitty vehicle maps weren't there.

You never played Reflex. It's actually a very good port of MW. Sure, the graphics aren't that great, but everything from MW is there. It's better than the 360/PS3 versions almost everywhere except graphics.

GI is incredibly ignorant and biased when it comes to any Wii game that isn't 1st party. All over the place (in The Conduit, MW:R, RedSteel 2, Darkside Chronicles, WaW, and Monster Hunter Tri are the only ones that come to mind) in Wii games, GI fails to play them or go deeper than the first 15 minutes. I constantly read about "heavily lacking in control," when almost every single aspect of controlling the game can be tweaked to the user's preferences.

GI docked down Reflex to a 6.5 because of bad graphics, yet stating that "the core gameplay is flawless"

This still bugs me; in the Darkside Chronicles review, the reviewer says something along the lines of "...it's annoying that you have to pause the game to use a green herb, which is really distracting," and that isn't true.

They also went on saying that The Conduit's control schemes did not meet up to their expectations, when you can change/adjust every button, sensitivity, speed and dead zone. Same for Reflex.

So yes, GI is incredibly biased against playing 3rd party Wii games. Reading some of their reviews on them makes me think "Wow, did they even play the game?" So actually, Nintendo Power would be a much better source for reliable Wii/DS/3DS reviews.

GI is going to fail so hard when the 3DS comes out, I can just tell.

All in all, the kid was pretty much right, and GI just came back with a snobby, arrogant comeback, which really showed how stupid GI actually is when it comes to reviewing Wii games and how much they really like their 360/PS3's and probably felt really cool after publishing that. Basically, that's a pretty big punch in the gut. I hardly respect GI after publishing that. After all, I would imagine they're college graduates, not 12 year olds.

So yeah, that's basically everything wrong with your post. Sorry, but you're wrong and you pretty much failed, and I'm not being mean, either. Just honest.

Before you go about saying anything, I have not legitimately sat down and played a Wii game in a while, roughly a month. I am not a Wii fanboy. I am not a Nintendo fanboy. I've been busy enjoying my high-quality Steam games...

I wish GI had instead of being snobbish about it, referenced the high scores they've given to wii games, Mad world got an 8, smash bros got a 9. something and a game of the month award, super mario galaxy 1 and 2 both scored high, the problem isn't really with the wii but the developers who make shovelware for the system because of its casual audience, if the wii had a more hardcore audience we'd probably get better games because the shovelware wouldn't be selling, I mean what kind of self respecting gamer buys abc's wipeout: the game, or cooking mama?

Both arguments here seem a tad extreme to me...

The facts:

- The Wii has a poor graphics card. Yes, it does keep the caliber of games being as good as a PS3 or 360, but that doesn't mean that Wii games can't look good. Examples of good-looking Wii games include Super Mario Galaxy (1 & 2), Resident Evil 4, Mad World, and Super Smash Bros. Brawl.

- The Wii has inferior 3rd Party Support. Many developers, including EA, have already claimed this in numerous interviews. A solid effort was actually put into 3rd Party titles such as Madworld, No More Heroes, and Dead Space: Extraction. The problem is though that these games haven't sold enough to impress the developers. The sales for these games have been so bad that developers have almost seen no reason to put an effort to making good games for the Wii if they are not going to sell well. The sales for Dead Space: Extraction were so poor that EA is going to include the game with Dead Space 2 on PS3, with hopes that it will appeal to consumers owning the other console.

As for Game Informer's apparent bias, I wouldn't form that opinion simply based on a handful of reviews. There is equally another handful of reviews of 3rd party games that deserve a high score, such as Red Steel 2 (that got an 8), No More Heroes 2 (that got an 8.5), and Madworld (that got a 9).

For the most part, I don't believe Game Informer is bias. Andy (the Editor-In-Chief) has already addressed to the accusations before in one of the magazine's opening letters, and he has said himself that the magazine itself is not bias. Now as for individual reviewers, there might be some biased opinions among some of them, but that is only natural... I do believe for the most part, however, that they try to pair reviewers with games that they might actually enjoy.

S.T.A.R.S. Officer:

Uh... this is so heavily flawed that I'm not even sure where to begin.

COD:WaW was (not called COD5 either, sorry to break it to you) by no means bad. I enjoyed it until the hackers came a long and Treyarch never fixed it.

Quite obviously the Wii's graphics aren't that great. We reached that conclusion... God, uh... 3 years ago? 4 years ago?

I haven't ever seen someone's eyes really "move" in any model of an NPC/Player ever. Moving eyes is pretty difficult to do without being in a cut-scene or scripted movement.

They did not take out any of the original maps. The map pack maps just were not included. Also, there were no vehicles in the WaW on the Wii, hence why the shitty vehicle maps weren't there.

You never played Reflex. It's actually a very good port of MW. Sure, the graphics aren't that great, but everything from MW is there. It's better than the 360/PS3 versions almost everywhere except graphics.

GI is incredibly ignorant and biased when it comes to any Wii game that isn't 1st party. All over the place (in The Conduit, MW:R, RedSteel 2, Darkside Chronicles, WaW, and Monster Hunter Tri are the only ones that come to mind) in Wii games, GI fails to play them or go deeper than the first 15 minutes. I constantly read about "heavily lacking in control," when almost every single aspect of controlling the game can be tweaked to the user's preferences.

GI docked down Reflex to a 6.5 because of bad graphics, yet stating that "the core gameplay is flawless"

This still bugs me; in the Darkside Chronicles review, the reviewer says something along the lines of "...it's annoying that you have to pause the game to use a green herb, which is really distracting," and that isn't true.

They also went on saying that The Conduit's control schemes did not meet up to their expectations, when you can change/adjust every button, sensitivity, speed and dead zone. Same for Reflex.

So yes, GI is incredibly biased against playing 3rd party Wii games. Reading some of their reviews on them makes me think "Wow, did they even play the game?" So actually, Nintendo Power would be a much better source for reliable Wii/DS/3DS reviews.

GI is going to fail so hard when the 3DS comes out, I can just tell.

All in all, the kid was pretty much right, and GI just came back with a snobby, arrogant comeback, which really showed how stupid GI actually is when it comes to reviewing Wii games and how much they really like their 360/PS3's and probably felt really cool after publishing that. Basically, that's a pretty big punch in the gut. I hardly respect GI after publishing that. After all, I would imagine they're college graduates, not 12 year olds.

So yeah, that's basically everything wrong with your post. Sorry, but you're wrong and you pretty much failed, and I'm not being mean, either. Just honest.

Before you go about saying anything, I have not legitimately sat down and played a Wii game in a while, roughly a month. I am not a Wii fanboy. I am not a Nintendo fanboy. I've been busy enjoying my high-quality Steam games...

Did you read the same review that I did for Reflex, because they don't say the core gameplay is flawless. They say that everything was mapped the same at an extreme cost to graphics, and control wise they stated that there are not enough buttons to compensate for the complexities of the control scheme.

That doesn't read as the core gameplay being flawless.

As for Darkside Chronicles, they gave it an 8. According to Metacritic, it has a 75, which means they gave it an above average rating equal to Nintendo Power. Are you going to rage on Nintendo Power as well? The health item comment was in the second opinion. Take it up with Annette if you really have a problem with it.

Honestly, I think you're just grabbing for bits to complain about with their reviews.

I only have problems with their reviews then they are significantly above or below the industry aversage. Like Monster Hunter Tri, which got a 7, but has a Metacritic score of 85%.

In the end it comes down to the reviewer's experience with the game. Personally, I'd give Bioshock 2 a 7 at best. But it received an 8.5. Different strokes, and they actually gave good reasons in my opinion for docking it. If hit detection is shoddy, I'd dock some points as well.

Reed:

So I received the new game informer in the mail. I opened up (As always) to the reader comments. One comment really got to me.

 

Basically a kid was going on about how if the same game came out for the wii it was instantly bad. And "nintendo power" was better

First no. Nintendo power is not better.

Second here are my thoughts:

Nintendo is like sega was (or used to be). They make their own games and systems. I used to be a hardcore nintendo fanatic. But they failed me with the wii. If you ever played call of duty 5 for the wii (which you probably couldnt dream of) you'd know it would suck. Basically the gun isn't really in the game once you think about it, it's kind of like they took a picture of it and made it move around. The graphics are awful (not that graphics matter but i like to see peoples eyes move before i shoot them in the face), they tookout about 3 or 4 of the original maps and don't have map packs, and I really do feel bad for the sad souls playing that game thinking its of xbox or ps3 standards.  So basically the other companies dont want to work on whole different controls and graphics for the wii . Unless they're bored and need a new title (Much like modern warfare reflex edition). Sure the wii is an ok system but if you're looking for some hardcore games you should probably go with the other systems.

I'm not saying this thread is a fail it's just more of a blog post than a discussion

I'm inclined to believe that certain reviewers (Reiner!) may be biased, but review scores are not quality evidence. Flat out despicable lies (Reiner!) are.

You know, this is why I sometimes hate the scoring system.  Everyone focuses on that stupid number more than they do the review itself, where everything they liked and disliked about a given game is revealed.

I disagree with your comments about the GI response: I don't think that anything but that response would've gotten to the little turd. It does seem that GI is a bit biased against the Wii, but if you had to play your way through all the crap like Boogie and Carnival Games, I think you would be biased too.

@Demon Ragnorak:Amen!

The writer said:

"Why are you guys so biased and dishonest? Give some credit to Nintendo for once! I'm a huge Nintendo fan, and you don't give their games fair reviews. You put them down because you assume nintendo is for nerds. On the other hand, you guys worship the XBOX360 and PS3 because thats what the "cool people" play. That's totally unfair bias. Another unfair trait is your attention to the title of the games. If it sounds violent or evil, you assume it will be good. Thus, not suprisingly, every Call of Duty game (except for the Wii version- how predictable!). My final complaint is your obsession with so-called hot female characters. You choose to like a game with a concept involving hot girls. That is not reason enough to like a game. You should be ashamed, and also be well known for your obsession with being "cool", at least by your definition and standards. I subscribe to Nintendo Power as well, and I gotta admit: They are much more fair and honest about their games.And being cool does not monopolize their lives. That's why all gamers should choose them over you any day!

Gameinformer was not snobby, they in fact didn't even take the little troll seriously.

They replied:

This is either a fanatical rant or a pitch-perfect parody of a fanatical rant. Honestly, we can barely tell the difference anymore. You are right about one thing, though: Being cool does monopolize our lives. To stay on top of all the hit trends, we have to spend our free time reading Twilight books, watching Real Housewives, and calling people "bro". It's tough being so awesome.

That's pretty snobby, and quite frankly the stupidest possible thing GI ever could have published, considering that they don't really give any Wii games a chance, and just play them for 10 minutes and write a review and fail at the core gameplay and features...

In the end, if I don't like a score given by GI, there's other publications with different opinions. There is always someone out there to agree with.