Adam Sessler versus Review Scores

[TheGreatAndPowerfulZOG]

I used to watch a lot of At The Movies, and I really like the Thumbs Up/Down method of evaluating films. Sometimes Ebert would have serious problems with a movie, but still recommend it with the same "score" as his favorite films. Roeper was a tool but I also really appreciated getting multiple opinions, and seeing a discussion about the work. I remember EGM used to sometimes have three editors review the same game without talking to each other before scoring it - I loved that! Adam is right on the money as usual.

Anyone remember when sites would routinely have a category for "graphics" that would be averaged into the final score? I'm sure IGN and other shitty sites still do this too, it blows my mind.

 

[RaikuFA]

This is the same idiot who lumps every jrpg as garbage and thinks every fps is a godsend.

His point is moot.

EDIT: Thats Tommy Tallarico I was reffering to, not Sessler, my bad(although I could've sworn hes done that as well, just going "This game sucks because it's a jrpg.). He still reeks douche in my POV for saying anyone who likes Megaman is an idiot.

Oh you're not mistaken. Sessler has a deep loathing of JRPG's, and it's referenced many times in the show (from what I remember.) And you know... it'd be one thing if he just kind of sat quietly in the background and just let that be his stance. I would be ok with him if he did that.

But nope. He's motherfuckin Adam Sessler. He will never pass up an opportunity to slam something he hates, and even fans of something he hates. I can't recall how many times he takes pop shots at the final fantasy fanbase, and then takes his smug little attitude towards the backlash. The guy's a fuckin troll. And I for one got tired of nibbling on his flamebait.

He does the same with Megaman. He called the people upset over MML3s cancellation idiots for being upset over a game that we waited 10 years for and said we deserved it for liking Megaman.

Same with anime based games. Yeah most of them are mediocre at best but he'd say Jump Ultimate Stars is the worst of them all. That game was a masterpiece and the closest thing we ever got to Super Smash Brothers on the DS.

 

[Titan Buttons]

I definitly Agree with what he says but I am not sure what the rating system should be replaced with because otherwise how will one be able to judge what they like.

With words. Reviewers tend to be pretty clear on their opinions on games through their writing.

While words do make it clearer as to what the game is in more detail there is always ones personal preferences that come out even in reviews that aren't bias, such as, someones favorite games being FPS. They will always consider them to be better then other game types solely because they enjoy them more.

 

[DustinOffAClassic]

Interesting. Because all Sessler seems to give a flying crap about is story and atmosphere.

Look at his Mafia 2 review. "Tiresome" combat, mediocre level design and AI, typical health system with ugly de-saturating effect..........but he drools all over the atmosphere and story and gives it a 4/5.

Sessler puts so little emphasis on actual gameplay these days. And furthermore, he's gotten a lot more lenient.

 

[DustyDrB]

I definitly Agree with what he says but I am not sure what the rating system should be replaced with because otherwise how will one be able to judge what they like.

With words. Reviewers tend to be pretty clear on their opinions on games through their writing.

While words do make it clearer as to what the game is in more detail there is always ones personal preferences that come out even in reviews that aren't bias, such as, someones favorite games being FPS. They will always consider them to be better then other game types solely because they enjoy them more.

That's a factor in reviews, yes, but it's not something that is fixed by a numerical score. The rating isn't objective. It's just an extremely watered down summary of a reviewer's opinion of his experience with a game, an opinion that is still influenced by his own preferences.

I find the best way to get the most of of reviews is to find and follow a few whose preferences tend to align with your own. So you build up a sort of rapport and understand what they value more and value less. Everyone is biased, so you might as well turn to someone who happens to share your biases.

Interesting. Because all Sessler seems to give a flying crap about is story and atmosphere.

Look at his Mafia 2 review. "Tiresome" combat, mediocre level design and AI, typical health system with ugly de-saturating effect..........but he drools all over the atmosphere and story and gives it a 4/5.

Sessler puts so little emphasis on actual gameplay these days. And furthermore, he's gotten a lot more lenient.

So? He values story. For some, a good story can elevate the experience. Even if the gameplay isn't so great, it can still be interesting if you're invested in the narrative. Even so, your argument wouldn't discredit his view on numerical scoring.

 

[DustinOffAClassic]

So? He values story. For some, a good story can elevate the experience. Even if the gameplay isn't so great, it can still be interesting if you're invested in the narrative. Even so, your argument wouldn't discredit his view on numerical scoring.

If he'd rather watch a movie (or watch FF13), fine. But GAMEPLAY must be the ultimate factor in evaluating a game.

 

[SnakeCL]

This was posted on Neogaf, and I figured I'd list it here. It involves John Updike, a famous writer, but also a famous literary critic.

"Updike was also a critic of literature and art, one frequently cited as one of the best American critics of his generation.[34] In the introduction to Picked-Up Pieces, his 1975 collection of prose, he listed his personal rules for literary criticism:
Updike delivering the 2008 Jefferson Lecture.

1. Try to understand what the author wished to do, and do not blame him for not achieving what he did not attempt.

2. Give enough direct quotation ? at least one extended passage ? of the book's prose so the review's reader can form his own impression, can get his own taste.

3. Confirm your description of the book with quotation from the book, if only phrase-long, rather than proceeding by fuzzy précis.

4. Go easy on plot summary, and do not give away the ending.

5. If the book is judged deficient, cite a successful example along the same lines, from the author's ?uvre or elsewhere. Try to understand the failure. Sure it's his and not yours?"

To these concrete five might be added a vaguer sixth, having to do with maintaining a chemical purity in the reaction between product and appraiser. Do not accept for review a book you are predisposed to dislike, or committed by friendship to like. Do not imagine yourself a caretaker of any tradition, an enforcer of any party standards, a warrior in any ideological battle, a corrections officer of any kind. Never, never ... try to put the author "in his place," making of him a pawn in a contest with other reviewers. Review the book, not the reputation. Submit to whatever spell, weak or strong, is being cast. Better to praise and share than blame and ban. The communion between reviewer and his public is based upon the presumption of certain possible joys of reading, and all our discriminations should curve toward that end.[35] "

I feel as though these rules should be something set in stone for reviewers, and are, quite often something that many reviewers appear to forget. In many reviews, I almost feel like the reviewer has assumed the role of the warrior or "putting the designers in their place" and such, as well as espousing the virtues of a game.

Not to say Sessler is guilty of any of the such (quite the contrary), but I find it interesting that Uncharted is being punished in many reviews for what its not, instead of celebrated for what it is.

Kudos for Ashes1396 for the quote on the gaf.

 

[Titan Buttons]

I definitly Agree with what he says but I am not sure what the rating system should be replaced with because otherwise how will one be able to judge what they like.

With words. Reviewers tend to be pretty clear on their opinions on games through their writing.

While words do make it clearer as to what the game is in more detail there is always ones personal preferences that come out even in reviews that aren't bias, such as, someones favorite games being FPS. They will always consider them to be better then other game types solely because they enjoy them more.

That's a factor in reviews, yes, but it's not something that is fixed by a numerical score. The rating isn't objective. It's just an extremely watered down summary of a reviewer's opinion of his experience with a game, an opinion that is still influenced by his own preferences.

I find the best way to get the most of of reviews is to find and follow a few whose preferences tend to align with your own. So you build up a sort of rapport and understand what they value more and value less. Everyone is biased, so you might as well turn to someone who happens to share your biases.

Like I said I don't believe the numerical score is right but I do believe there should be some way to indicate, mainly to people new to that game type, whether a game is better then another and the reasons behind that, such as having different bars each representing a different thing for a game, such as a FPS having one for story, one for visuals, one for replability and another for difficulty. Whilst, an MMO having completely different bars for say co-op and exploration and so on.

That is actually quite a good and something I try to follow but I find it hard to find a review that likes FPS, Puzzle games and RPG all equally as there favorites