Why Jim Sterling's Mario Kart 7 review is bullshit.

[Kopikatsu]

Actually, this quote pretty much sums up his opinion of it fairly well.

Whether you like what it does is a matter of personal taste, but the skill and experience brought to the table is hard to refute. Modern Warfare 3 gets it done, and it gets it done damn well.

yeah, I see where he comes from, even if I think that place is horrendously wrong. As an example, that quote.
Sure, it gets something done. That something is absolute shit, imo, and doing really shitty games well is not a plus.
Anyways, thanks for answering my question.

Why do you think Call of Duty is absolute shit, if you don't mind my asking?

Modern Warfare 3 is a game 8 years in development (Since I consider each CoD game to be a tech demo for the next one. I know that I personally am unimpressed with the Call of Duty series as a whole, but as a military shooter, it's pretty up there in terms of quality/gameplay. Even if it's not gameplay that I particularly enjoy.

 

[Flying Dagger]

If you read the article, he gives it a low score because he didn't enjoy it.
obviously if you have a game you don't enjoy, and you don't try to innovate, you are going to continue to make a game that won't be enjoyed.

 

[lacktheknack]

So he didn't like it and gave it an average score, one of his main reasons being that it didn't change enough.

I don't see the problem?

 

[crazyarms33]

http://www.destructoid.com/review-mario-kart-7-216484.phtml

Jim Sterling, once again showing what a hypocrite he is, gives Mario Kart 7 a 5 out of 10 for being a "stagnant, crawling, and indolent effort" despite being more lenient towards the Dynasty Warriors series, which is just as stagnant as this game, if not more.

But I kind of have a problem in general that the idea that being similar to previous games makes a game bad.

Let me ask you something, Jim. Does Mario Kart 7 have new tracks? Does it have new characters? Does it have various minor tweaks to the formula, such as gliding, underwater racing, and kart customization?

If you answered "yes" to any of these, you've invalidated your own argument. Simply having new levels or any sort of new content more than a reskin is enough to keep any game series fresh. If a sequel has the exact same gameplay and graphics engine as the previous game, but has new levels, then it is still just as fun as the previous entry but is new enough to warrant a purchase.

I'm not saying innovation is bad, I'm just saying that you shouldn't automatically assume that the absence of it is bad. You can have a sequel change the formula to keep things new and exciting, as long as it's true to the spirit of the original and still fun, but after a certain point, there's nowhere left to go. Mario Kart has reached the point where there really isn't much to improve, but that's not a bad thing at all. Don't act like you NEED to make a radical change with each new game to keep the series fun, that's just bullshit. You just need new levels, new characters, a graphics update, and a few other minor tweaks.

Careful, your fan boy is showing .

People ***** and complain about how Nintendo never releases anything good or new, and this is the exact reason they don't have to. New tracks and characters(not new in the grand scheme just new to the game) are great. Are they a reason to drop $60 on a game? If you answered yes, CONGRATULATIONS you are Nintendo's target audience. The one they re-release games on new systems for so that their customer will go "Now that its on the Wii/DS it must be awesome!" They do it because they know that you will buy it, and hail it as the greatest/best game recently or at least in the series.

Certainly nothing is wrong with making new mario games, they can be fun and always worth a small amount of time. And its not like Nintendo is the only one guilty of this...looking at you COD. However many people DO want that innovation, that newness in a game and if they don't get it, they are disappointed. The fact that he doesn't like it doesn't make it a bad game, it just means he didnt like it.

 

[crazyarms33]

OP
"If a sequel has the exact same gameplay and graphics engine as the previous game, but has new levels, then it is still just as fun as the previous entry"

He's right, I mean look at the Star Wars prequels, same universe with new set pieces - easily as good as the Original Trilogy, that's just Science.

I spat out my drink when I read this. Worth it. Excellent point as well!

 

[theultimateend]

*cough CoD haters cough*

Anyway, the Mario Kart series has always been simple fun, and this one looks and sounds just as good. I'd rather them not change it up too much, actually.

*cough again CoD haters cough again*

My feeling on pokemon.

I don't mind the subtle changes because I really enjoy it.

I feel the same way about sex and dozens of kinds of food. If they never change in my life I'll not be one bit sad about it.

So he didn't like it and gave it an average score, one of his main reasons being that it didn't change enough.

I don't see the problem?

5 is perfectly fine for a game review. We've got such bad score inflation that it seems horrifying.

If only Jim Sterlings credibility were as wide as his body.

LOL FAT JOKES!

HEY EVERYBODY THIS GUY NOTICED HE'S FAT! LETS ALL POINT AND LAUGH!

I realize he didn't take the healthy living option but the guy doesn't complain about his weight as far as I know. I'm not overweight myself (135 at 5'11) but physical appearance jokes are about as far down in the barrel of jokes as someone can go.

Especially in a country that has ritualized eating high calorie low nutrition food to the point where it is a crime in some states to badmouth the food manufacturers.

 

[MaxwellEdison]

Actually, this quote pretty much sums up his opinion of it fairly well.

Whether you like what it does is a matter of personal taste, but the skill and experience brought to the table is hard to refute. Modern Warfare 3 gets it done, and it gets it done damn well.

yeah, I see where he comes from, even if I think that place is horrendously wrong. As an example, that quote.
Sure, it gets something done. That something is absolute shit, imo, and doing really shitty games well is not a plus.
Anyways, thanks for answering my question.

Why do you think Call of Duty is absolute shit, if you don't mind my asking?

Modern Warfare 3 is a game 8 years in development (Since I consider each CoD game to be a tech demo for the next one. I know that I personally am unimpressed with the Call of Duty series as a whole, but as a military shooter, it's pretty up there in terms of quality/gameplay. Even if it's not gameplay that I particularly enjoy.

Lack of decent story, mainly. It's basically been an excuse to sell multiplayer for a while now, IMO, and I find better gameplay for my tastes elsewhere.
And to quote Jim, "You have to use your personal preference to review something." He made an entire video about how reviews are only about personal taste. That's something I agree with.

 

[Aegixx]

His taste in games is terrible, but he's absolutely hilarious.
I don't have a problem with that

 

[derelict]

If there's nothing new except for a few tweaks then there's no point in buying the game. That would make the game useless.

Indeed, but more specifically there was no point in releasing said game in the first place. This may be where OP is missing the point: minor tweaks and such could be handled with an add-on pack of some sort, but instead it was released as a whole game. In this case I can use the ...er, case, of one of my favorite games to make the point: Forza 4

In FM4, you have a very simple formula, its just a racing game, to which you can't add much, however now they have autovista with commentary added, some secret cars to get through various methods, several new game modes that are both racing (multi-class and the like) and hooligan fun (car soccer and top gear bowling). Also, they'd completely revamped tire physics. That would be enough to make a whole game around. If they added a couple tracks and cars and released it as a full game rather'n an add-on, they'd be critically panned for it, and I think the reason Mario Kart gets away with it may be due to the fact they don't regularly release add-ons for their game, but I'm just guessing there.

 

[cdstephens]

About the whole CoD vs. MK thing:

He didn't like MK, so he gave it an average review. He loves CoD, so he gave it a higher score.

Er, isn't that how reviews are supposed to work? It makes absolutely no sense to me to review a game only by its own merits and not to take into consideration what every other game has done and its competition. You can't make a judgement call on whether something is good or bad without something else to compare it to. Quality when it comes to entertainment is purely subjective; it's not like with computer hardware where you can objectively say that one is definitely better than the other. When it comes down to apples and oranges, all you have left to stand on is saying whether you liked the apple or the orange better.

It's rather stupid to expect him to bash on something he loves, isn't it? It'd be different if he didn't have valid points about why he felt meh about MK and why he really liked CoD, but he did have valid points and reasoning to his feelings. You can't say his taste in games is terrible; it's his taste in games. It's like saying an RTS player is wrong for not liking God of War.

And if you don't agree with Destructoid's review system and don't agree with his opinions to such a point that you get angry, then why are you reading Destructoid in the first place? It's like taking a bite of your least favorite food; just don't do it, and everyone will be better for it.

 

[Torrasque]

The last Mario Kart I truly enjoyed was on the N64. It had it's many faults but was fun.

However, Double Dash on the Gamecube was just awful and on the Wii incarnation was not much better (bikes, reeeeally?). If I remember, there was a DS version between the two, which was enjoyable.

For me, the series has gotten quite stale but I shall try out Mario Kart 7 before passing full judgement on it; but from a couple of reviews I have read it seems to be quite average.


I do agree with on the speed issue; damn too slow. Painful on Wii just plodding along and Double Dash had no dash to it.

I played the fuck out of the DS Mario Kart, hated the Wii and gamecube games, and plan on buying Mario Kart 7 cuz it looks like Diddy Kong racing + Mario Kart.
The only racing games I've enjoyed have been the Mario Kart series, and I plan on enjoying this one as well.
As for Jim's review, I will take it with a grain of salt like any review I read ever. He is entitled to his opinions and I won't whip out my rioting torch if I disagree with some of them. The only times I allow a review to affect my judgement of a game is when it is similar to my thoughts of the game, or when many reviews say the same thing.

 

[Yopaz]

Again people get overly involved with review scores. Seriously, why bother? He operates on a scale where giving a game 7 is a good score while other sites don't dare give less than 8 or 9 for a good game.
I will still play this game and I will probably receive it today... not get the chance to play for a long time yet, but receive it today... this review just makes it easier to hold it off until after my exams.

 

[jthwilliams]

Well, I actually think game reviewers should be non mainstream. I like it when I read 2 reviews that I get two different views on a game I'm thinking about buying. Score should be abolished and anyone who buys or doesn't buy a game based on the score alone is likely to get games that he or she wont like.

that being said I do understand the frustration. I've read reviews of games I like written by people who clearly didn't like the genre of game and said it was bad for all the reasons I thought it was good. I admit my kneed jerk reaction was to yell at my monitor why do you review this type of game since the genre clearly displeases you. But then I take a breath a remind myself that the reviewers agreement or disagreement with my subjective opion is just as valid and has no judgement value on me or the games I like.

So at the end of the day, If you get upset becomes someone reviews a game and doesn't like it, then the problem is you, not them. If the reviewer says the game is crap and then can't say why the feel that way, then they are a crappy reviewer. If they say it is good and then can't say why they are also a crappy reviewer. The job of the reviewer is to give me a good idea of what the experience is going to be before I buy the game. Metacritic is the devil for suggesting that you can average scores out. They've made a psudo science out of reviewing things which doesn't do anyone any good, but does make them a lot of money.


If you are going to be pissed at anyone be pissed at metacritic and stop viewing their site, your personaly value is in no way connected to the average review score across the internet of things you like.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

Though I do find it somewhat odd that he praises Call of Duty and <Dynasty Warriors[/I], while criticizing a game with the major criticisms of CoD and DW. Ain't nothing wrong with iteration, mind... unless it happens to make a game worse for it. This is Mario Kart SEVEN, I'm really not surprised reviewers are turning to this and calling it "stale", at this point.

He didn't really praise Call of Duty. He just said that it defined the FPS genre. That makes it worth a 9. If he thought it was an awesome game AND defined a genre, then it would be a 10/

I'm talking about his stance on the series as a whole: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/3285-Defending-Call-of-Duty

And, I'm sorry, but what? Since when did "defines a genre" make something worthy of a 9/10, "near-perfect," score? FFXIII defined the pile-of-shit genre. I guess that makes it 9/10! Keeping in mind, beyond anything else, a score is designed to recommend something. (Thus why you're better off buying an 8/10 game than a 5/10 game.) It's consumer advice, it shouldn't be mathematical, or even logical. No "not awesome" game should even get close to 9/10.

 

[Antari]

You might want to keep in mind and this is something Jim would probably agree with. Is that he isn't exactly the target audience for Mario Kart. As well his review isn't some sort of law that has now banned the game from existence. He just made a review and didn't like the game. You definately don't need to worry about it, Nintendo certainly won't.

 

[Gatx]

I understand that it's supposed to be his opinion, and that he definitely likes the Dynasty Warriors games while he may or may not like Mario Kart to that same extent, it does seem unfair. If you look at his, admittadley tongue-in-cheek top 10 Dynasty Warriors games list, which shows that he's aware that each game in the series is more or less a rehash of the other one, yet he still gave 7 an 8 (okay, that did also happen to be the one where they completely redid the combat system and gave all the characters redesigns), but Mario Kart 7 offers at least changed up the gameplay enough to warrant NOT being called just another Mario Kart.

*EDIT*

My mistake, apparently it was the 6th game that had the massive overhaul, 7 was just some tweaks to 6.

 

[Adzma]

If he gave Mario Kart a 5 and MW3 a 9.5, then he really is the biggest troll on the internet, and you sir have been played by him perfectly.

 

[caviar1]

hey u mad bro? what does it matter what one person thought of a game? is it going to hurt the game's sales? is it going to change your opinion of the game? is your life in any way diminished because one person in the world gave a biased review of a game? unless you have some horrific disease that causes you to have fun based on what reviewers have to say, im fairly certain you'll be fine. Jim actually did a really great episode on how he feels about people getting angry about game reviews. i recommend you give it a looksie.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

why are we still paying attention to this guy? Just ignore him and eventually he'll go away. He's like a brat who breaks something for attention.

 

[DrederickTatum]

Complaining about someone's opinion on the internet.

Gentlemen, we have peaked in class and status.