Yooka-Laylee reviews are coming out and thoughts are ...mixed

Metalix Knightmare

New member
Sep 27, 2007
831
0
0
Joccaren said:
Well, this has turned into a thread about Jim, so, fuck it.

In regards to his couple of most recent reviews, I'm finding him less of a reliable reviewer, and more like a Youtube amateur hour reviewer.

Lets look at Yooka Laylee. He doesn't like 90s style platformer collectathons. He buys a 90s style platformer collectathon, and his review is largely "2/10, its a 90s style platformer collectathon".
To me, this is just stupid. Why even bother reviewing something if you KNOW you're not going to like it going into it? It'd be like me playing Dynasty Warriors and giving it a 2/10 because it isn't a RTS game - and you can bet your ass he'd have a field day with someone attacking one of his favourite franchises for being what it was promised rather than something else that I wanted. He'd be saying it was stupid to review it as an RTS when its obviously not - yet its exactly what he has done.
Hell, he has done similar before - he rounds up all the 2/10 reviews for games from Metacritic and ridicules them for being out of touch. A lot of fanboy trolling, however he even ridicules the ones that just didn't enjoy a game and rate it really low for not enjoying it at all, for disagreeing with him. He doesn't get a defence for doing that same thing here.

Of course, he's entitled to his opinions, his opinions in this case are just worthless though. The review could honestly have been summed up as "I don't like 90s platformers, this is one".
Hell, IGN gave a more impartial review. Fucking IGN. That's a joke.

When it came to BotW, I can understand his criticisms a bit more. That said, he went too far in ignoring the merits of the game, which was evidenced in other episodes where he praises other games for doing the exact things BotW does, yet never mentioned for BotW. There was also a bit of expecting the game to be something else, rather than reviewing it on its own merits, but I can understand a small amount of that, and that's fair enough. His criticisms were mostly fair, though he seems to have missed a lot of the positives because of his focus on them.

Jim reviews games 100% by how much he enjoyed them - with his pre-play biases strongly impacting the scores. If before trying something he thinks its going to be bad, he's going to rate it poorly because of that rather than coming at it with a fresh mind. This is ok, however it means you cannot take him as a remotely reliable source of game quality or enjoyability. His analysis is often also simplistic or flawed, meaning there's minimal takeaway from it.

"But all reviews are subjective" I hear you say. To an extent, is the answer. I've heard "What other medium has an average 7/10 review score?", as if Jim giving a 2 is him fighting this trend. It isn't. He is perpetuating it. Games have relatively high review scores because reviewers review them almost solely on personal enjoyment, and most people tend to enjoy the games they play. Hence, high review scores. Jim doing exactly the same thing, but not liking a couple of games, isn't bucking the trend - its continuing it.
Counter question; When's the last time a respected movie critic reviewed a competently executed movie in a genre they didn't like a 2/10, because they didn't like the genre?
I'll sit and wait. The answer is, it doesn't.

And that's the difference between videogame reviews, and other reviews. Other reviews have actual critics; people who are literate in the medium they are reviewing, and provide a baseline objective review, with some subjectiveness sprinkled in. Even that subjectivity often comes down to how good the writing is, which is only partially subjective as there are again objective qualities people can base their reviews on.
When it comes to videogames, the majority of reviewers are illiterate. They don't understand game design theory, how things fit together, and the effect it has on the game. As a result of this, they can only give a review based on how they felt about the game, and that turns it from somewhat subjective, to fully subjective - as shown with Yooka Laylee. This is useless, unless your taste in games is exactly the same as the reviewer's.
And yeah, such hobbyist reviewers exist for movies and books and such too. However you ALSO have professional critics who know what they're talking about. Jim is considered the latter, whilst being very much the former. That's the problem.

And yes, it is a problem. It isn't just a slight "Well just find a reviewer you like" problem, it creates a huge level of inconsistency.

What were Jim's criticisms of Yooka Laylee?
-Simple Combat
-Poor level design
-Poor platforming controls
-Poorly written dialogue
-Poor voiceovers.

Score? 2/10.

Now lets look at Mass Effect Andromeda.
All of those points, except Simple Combat, apply. Platforming is even a pretty core part of the game, blocking of several areas until you complete a platforming puzzle and being required to finish the main story. Does he mention it though? No, of course not.
The game is also extremely buggy, and is a technical shitshow.

We get a 5/10 instead, because... ok?
For the same set of complaints, except bugginess being swapped for simple combat [With combat being a rather minor part of the game in question], we get hugely different review scores. In fact, prior to posting, he was contemplating even giving Andromeda a 7, despite he himself believing it was nowhere near as good as Zelda, which he also gave a 7.

Am I saying he should have reviewed Andromeda lower? No, I think 5-7 is a far range for it. Yooka Laylee, however, from all I've heard, also sits in that range, if not higher.

The scores are entirely arbitrary and utterly inconsistent. You literally cannot tell the quality or enjoyment of a game from them, as they change based on how you're feeling the day you review the game. Today a 7 means great, tomorrow it means average.

This is why a baseline level of objectiveness in reviews is useful, and expected in all mediums outside of games.
And people do do these kinds of objective analysis of games - they just don't write reviews. Numerous people will break down what makes a game tick, why some things are fun, why others aren't, because they're literate in game design. But again, they don't actually review the games, because that's not their focus. Their focus is on increasing game literacy, using examples.

Were reviewers to learn from videos such as this, some basic game design literacy, they would be able to both enjoy games more in general, being able to actually play games better and thus derive more enjoyment from them, rather than stubbornly sticking to a skillset from their favourite genre even when it doesn't apply, but also review games better, stating why some systems don't work at a design level, and why some do.
Throw in some writing literacy, and screenplay literacy, and hell, you'd have a good reviewer who could tell you how well designed something is and how it all fits together - and that does, for games at least, directly correlate to how enjoyable a game tends to be for its target audience. Throw in some subjective "I like/dislike this genre, and I don't/do enjoy this game" to keep the exact same quality of subjectiveness in reviews we have now, and you'd see average review scores plummet to 5-6, extremist review scores disappear for the most part outside of exceptionally good or bad games, and reviews become useful for everyone.
Honestly, after THIS...



I'm surprised anyone gives Jim's reviews any thought, let alone hold them in any regard.
 

TrulyBritish

New member
Jan 23, 2013
473
0
0
Metalix Knightmare said:
Honestly, after THIS...



I'm surprised anyone gives Jim's reviews any thought, let alone hold them in any regard.
He has a response to this criticism.
 

Xerosch

New member
Apr 19, 2008
1,288
0
0
On the one hand I think most reviews are mediocre because of the deliberate conservative approach which I can deal with. On the other we have been getting so many well reviewed games in the past months that at the moment I'd rather spend my time with Persona 5, Resident Evil 7, Kingdom Hearts, Nier and all the other stuff.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
17,359
1,502
118
Yoshi178 said:
called me out on it? more like jumped down my bloody throat and bombarded me with "you're wrong, prove it!" type comments even wanting me to do full on in depth research about Jim's entire history and dig up like like 20 or so games to compile a list of review scores that "support" my claim even further and more in depth despite the fact that i had already listed like 3 recent Playstation reviews from the Jimquisition website and compared them with the scores they Gave Yooka Laylee, and another game being Zelda.
You didn't have to do any research. One of the earliest posts showed favourable scores Jim gave to Nintendo exclussive games. All you had to do was look at it, and then you would've come to the logical conclusion that he wasn't a Sony fanboy.

And while we're at it, how does Jim not liking Yooka-Laylee prove he's a Sony fanboy? The game is on the PS4. You're acting like he pissed all over it because it's a Nintendo exclussive, which it isn't.


hell someone even just asked me last page if i know how "debates/discussions" work? last i checked i didn't even know i was in a debate, i just said something and then got dragged into a massive debate because people disagree with the thing i said.
You do know you're on a forum, right? Meaning the posts you make are read and sometimes responded to by other people. That's the whole idea behind a forum; discussion.
 

Yoshi178

New member
Aug 15, 2014
2,108
0
0
Neonsilver said:
Yoshi178 said:
He gave Nier: Automata a 9/10 like a .- Console exclusive to PS4
Nier: Automata is a for PS4 and PC, it's not a console exclusive.
pc isn't a console. so it is console exclusive to the PS4.

if i said Nier was exclusive to the PS4 that wouldn't be true because like you said, it's also on pc. but when talking about console exclusives i mean i'm literally only talking about the game being avaliable on PS4 but not the xbox or nintendo systems. that's what i mean by console exclusive.


Nier is console exclusive to PS4 in the same way that all of those games Microsoft puts out are console exclusive to xbox but are also available on PC
 

babinro

New member
Sep 24, 2010
2,518
0
0
Why aren't FAR more games like this?

Reviewers are human beings who all have their own unique tastes. I disliked GTA4 immediately and so did many others...yet reviewers largely showered that game with 9's and 10's and would have been lambasted for calling it a 5/10 experience.

You would think that mixed reviews SHOULD be the norm, right? They certainly are among the players.
 

zellosoli

New member
Aug 22, 2011
104
0
0
Yoshi178 said:
MCerberus said:
Yoshi178 said:
like that idiot Jim even matters.

like that idiot Jim even matters

Johnny Novgorod said:
Holy fuck, Sterling is on a roll.

Lisker84 said:
To be fair, Jim Sterling seems to hate just about everything.
He gave Nier: Automata a 9/10 like a week ago.
And Horizon Zero Dawn a 9.5/10 before that.
That's like straight out of his front page. I don't even follow the guy.
thats cause Jims a Sony Fanboy
found the Zelda fanboy
i prefer the terms Yoshi and Xenoblade Fanboy.
not sure if trolling or just plain cringy
 

Winnosh

New member
Sep 23, 2010
492
0
0
I'll say this about reviews. You go to a review to see if the critic liked it and why. You don't go to a review to see if You like it.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
McElroy said:
That's the thing here. Wouldn't rating games as toys and not art easily explain this? What are the Steam store pages and backs of disc cases filled with? Feature-lists, promises of playtime, replay-value, and high-scores etc. A toy with a neat list of features that also delivers them at an affordable price is already a good toy.

I kinda get the frustration or whatever it is. For example, I personally think GotG is mediocre, 5/10, and exactly because it delivered on the promises of its trailer and follows a predictable formula with some recognizable faces - and voice(s) - it got those 7s and 8s. I don't mind games being reviewed as toys mainly because I treat them as such (a decent story is just an extra and so on) with few exceptions.
Games have acquired more artistic qualities over time while the current review status quo is rather recent. I very much doubt any game reviewer would say that games aren't art. You even had games pushing writing and music way back during the NES/SNES eras like early FFs. I don't find a decent story to just be an extra. Sure, I don't game for writing as other mediums do it so much better, and games can obviously not even have a story. However, a game like Mass Effect wouldn't have been nearly as enjoyed by most gamers if the story and characters didn't resonate. I didn't pick up and probably won't pick up Andromeda because most feedback about the writing I've read is that it's pretty shitty. I play something like Mass Effect for the role-playing (one of the few games that actually focuses on role-playing) and story, so if that's not up to snuff, what's the point of playing it? I'll go back on play Vanquish for much better 3rd-person shooting as Mass Effect's gameplay isn't good enough to just play it for that. Even Vanquish and Bayonetta have fun B-movie quality writing vs something as bland as Watch Dogs. A game like Dishonored 2, which I loved, but the game would've been significantly more enjoyable with a riveting story and great characters. How could I rate it 9+/10 when say Dishonored 3 releases with great writing that significantly increases the experience? Because then I can't even give Dishonored 3 a whole point higher of a score because I gave the previous game a 9+.

I also play board games once a week and there's sometimes great disagreements between popular reviewers themselves and the guys in my group when board games are really just game mechanics and nothing else. There's plenty to disagree about just having to do with game mechanics and gameplay alone and not even touching on writing or music.

babinro said:
Why aren't FAR more games like this?

Reviewers are human beings who all have their own unique tastes. I disliked GTA4 immediately and so did many others...yet reviewers largely showered that game with 9's and 10's and would have been lambasted for calling it a 5/10 experience.

You would think that mixed reviews SHOULD be the norm, right? They certainly are among the players.
I totally agree, I hate the gameplay of pretty much all of Rockstar's games. I find the shooting to be subpar 3rd-person cover shooting along with the fact that linear missions in open world games defeat the purpose of said open world. I feel those are valid complaints, not everyone has to agree with them obviously. I also hate Dan Houser's writing so there really isn't much that I enjoy in a Rockstar game. It's not bias within the genre either because Watch Dogs is a much better example of a 3rd-person shooter in an open world from a gameplay and mission design standpoint. It really boggles the mind because there's no way any game or any piece of art is going to have such agreements of the quality of said art for anything to ever score mid to upper 90s for an average score.
 

Zombie Proof

New member
Nov 28, 2015
359
0
0
Yoshi178 said:
shrekfan246 said:
I mean, this is the internet, not a formal debate. There's nothing stopping people from doing that. I think the bigger part is that they shouldn't be quite so surprised when everyone else doesn't take them seriously.
oh trust me, this forum not taking me seriously doesn't surprise me AT ALL. the people on this forum have seemed to have a bug up it's ass for the longest time.

if i comment something that people here don't agree with like in this threads for instance, this forum will tear me to shreds and go ape shit at me just to hammer into me that i'm wrong and stupid or "retarded" as someone in this thread has already refereed to my opinion as.

and even if i'm not expressing an opinion about something that people disagree with. just doing something like making a simple thread about a game i'm excited for to try and start a discussion about it, there is just about always people here on this forum that have absolutely no interest in the game i'm excited for whatsoever, but will decide to come into my threads just to tell me "why this game/system is shit" and act like their opinion, in these case's thinking that the game i'm excited for is crap, is an extremely important opinion and like we should all pay attention to them and think the game is crap as well just because their opinion is oh so important, and everyone else's, including my own, isn't.




i'm really sick of the attitude by a lot of people on this forum to be quite honest. not talking about anyone here in particular, but just in general the attitude of people i find around this forum to be quite honest.
You so rarely post anything resembling substance that I've regarded your posts as little more than porn spam since GT. You CAN'T be shocked that people react to you with aggression when you post otherwise. To do so is evident of a serious lack of self reflection/awareness.

That's not to say the internet isn't rife with bungholes spraying shit from their keyboards like their lives depend on it, but you really don't do anything to enrich the experience beyond that from what I've seen.
 

Skatalite

New member
May 8, 2007
197
0
0
Yoshi178 said:
shrekfan246 said:
I mean, this is the internet, not a formal debate. There's nothing stopping people from doing that. I think the bigger part is that they shouldn't be quite so surprised when everyone else doesn't take them seriously.
oh trust me, this forum not taking me seriously doesn't surprise me AT ALL. the people on this forum have seemed to have a bug up it's ass for the longest time.
Right, right. It's not you, it's everyone else. Remember back on Gametrailers, where they had a bug up their ass as well?
For some reason people seem to act like that everywhere you go.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
Eh, I don't see the appeal. I can get why fans of banjo kazooie would be excited, I suppose, and I hope they like it, but I think I'll leave it be. I was never the biggest fan of the original Banjo games either. I am still a bit perplexed about them removing Jontron, and their subsequent response from the community. Especially given the demand for refunds.

Casual Shinji said:
Yoshi is upset
Just let him go back to playing with his legos and N64.
 

Yoshi178

New member
Aug 15, 2014
2,108
0
0
Skatalite said:
Yoshi178 said:
shrekfan246 said:
I mean, this is the internet, not a formal debate. There's nothing stopping people from doing that. I think the bigger part is that they shouldn't be quite so surprised when everyone else doesn't take them seriously.
oh trust me, this forum not taking me seriously doesn't surprise me AT ALL. the people on this forum have seemed to have a bug up it's ass for the longest time.
Right, right. It's not you, it's everyone else. Remember back on Gametrailers, where they had a bug up their ass as well?
For some reason people seem to act like that everywhere you go.
why am i not having these problems on easyallies then? OH RIGHT! you aren't on easyallies are you?

it takes two to tango mate. i wouldn't talk if i were you. you were one of those people that was always arguing on GT as well. El Shmiablo has changed for the better it seems. you sure as hell haven't changed since GT though.

anyway this is the present. let's NOT dig up old history relating to a forum that has nothing to do with this one, for the sake of this thread, especially since those arguments aren't even valid anymore given that me and the GT crew are good now and there haven't been any issues with me and them on Easyallies. if you want to go down that road, pm me instead.
 

Neonsilver

New member
Aug 11, 2009
289
0
0
Yoshi178 said:
Neonsilver said:
Yoshi178 said:
He gave Nier: Automata a 9/10 like a .- Console exclusive to PS4
Nier: Automata is a for PS4 and PC, it's not a console exclusive.
pc isn't a console. so it is console exclusive to the PS4.

if i said Nier was exclusive to the PS4 that wouldn't be true because like you said, it's also on pc. but when talking about console exclusives i mean i'm literally only talking about the game being avaliable on PS4 but not the xbox or nintendo systems. that's what i mean by console exclusive.


Nier is console exclusive to PS4 in the same way that all of those games Microsoft puts out are console exclusive to xbox but are also available on PC
Well, if you see it like this it's true. However considering you painted jim as a sony fanboy, because he liked Nier: Automata and the other games, it doesn't work. It's perfectly possible that jim played the game on pc.

Besides disregarding the pc because it's not a console is kind of stupid. The pc is part of the gaming market and it does compete with the consoles. You can't just dismiss the pc because it works better for your argument.

I could just as well say, that current consoles aren't consoles either. They are just pc's with fancy cases and a specialized os. Which would mean that Nier: Automata isn't available for console at all.
 

Pseudonym

Regular Member
Legacy
Nov 4, 2020
802
8
13
Country
Nederland
So has anyone here already played yooka laylee? Any thoughts on the actual game. It apparently is somewhat mediocre.

Joccaren said:
And yes, it is a problem. It isn't just a slight "Well just find a reviewer you like" problem, it creates a huge level of inconsistency.
Oh no. A huge level of inconsistency in videogame review scores? You know what that means? Nothing. Nothing of any importance at all.

At worst it means we can't accurately gauge whether we'll like a game by some number some guy put on it somewhere. Next we'll have to read the actual review, or read about the game in different places or watch a lets play. That would take less time than it probably cost you to put up that wall of text you got there. I honestly don't get what you think the problem is.
 

Yoshi178

New member
Aug 15, 2014
2,108
0
0
Neonsilver said:
I could just as well say, that current consoles aren't consoles either. They are just pc's with fancy cases and a specialized os.
well Playstation and Xbox pretty much are just wannabe pc's at this point these days for the most part.
seeing as all they ever really focus on when a new one comes out seems to just be how powerful the box can be. but let's not go there. lol
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,636
117
68
Phoenixmgs said:
McElroy said:
Phoenixmgs said:
What other art form is rated where 7 is average?
It's not like you don't know the answer to that and even why it's not the right question to ask. Video games are rated as toys, not art. Blockbuster movies often have this too.
Video games aren't rated as toys, 7 being average is actually a rather recent developement for the medium. Blockbuster movies get trashed by critics if they suck like Bad Boys 2, Transformers, Batman v Superman, etc.
7/10 average is for "proper" games though. Some of its marketing concerns, but the trend also starts to correlate with the rise in Internet and Digital Distribution. Which created tonnes of shovelware, buggy garbage, rejected high school programming class assignments, and literally games that have a 5% chance to start up or get out of the menu screen to fill in 0-5 with.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Seth Carter said:
7/10 average is for "proper" games though. Some of its marketing concerns, but the trend also starts to correlate with the rise in Internet and Digital Distribution. Which created tonnes of shovelware, buggy garbage, rejected high school programming class assignments, and literally games that have a 5% chance to start up or get out of the menu screen to fill in 0-5 with.
And, again, no other medium rates its art like that either. Movies released to theaters aren't automatic say 2-star movies because of Steven Seagal direct-to-video garbage or those knockoff Asylum movies (Transmorphers, Snakes on a Train, etc.).
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
So am I the only one who just doesn't agree with Jim but just isn't that bothered about it?