Zero Punctuation: Super Smash Bros. Brawl

[m_jim]

Yeah, not quite. While your assessment of "Internet people" holds some water, let me assure you that most big "review" sites/magazines have the same two modes.

If you're from a large studio who has a lot of clout (i.e. money), then the game is "F'ing awesome".

If not, it's probably going to be "F'ing awful".

Well, how about Assassin's Creed or Kane & Lynch? Both from big studios, both got lukewarm receptions from most review sites (please don't say Gerstman-gate, or we are going to go round and round). It seems to me that a good number of internet people have a bias against "popular" or "hyped" games. They want to see these games fail for some reason, I don't claim to know why. If they don't fail, the obviously it's a conspiracy. My question to you is this: can you accept that maybe Madden, Call of Duty: WW2 Again, or Spider Man 27 might be pretty good, or at least not horrible? Shouldn't truly bad scores be saved for rubbish such as Ninjabread Man and things for the NGage?
I'm not saying that money can't buy some reviews, but look at EGM's Dan Hsu; the man fought the law (Ubisoft dollars) and he won.

 

[Chewster]

Yeah, not quite. While your assessment of "Internet people" holds some water, let me assure you that most big "review" sites/magazines have the same two modes.

If you're from a large studio who has a lot of clout (i.e. money), then the game is "F'ing awesome".

If not, it's probably going to be "F'ing awful".

Well, how about Assassin's Creed or Kane & Lynch? Both from big studios, both got lukewarm receptions from most review sites (please don't say Gerstman-gate, or we are going to go round and round). It seems to me that a good number of internet people have a bias against "popular" or "hyped" games. They want to see these games fail for some reason, I don't claim to know why. If they don't fail, the obviously it's a conspiracy. My question to you is this: can you accept that maybe Madden, Call of Duty: WW2 Again, or Spider Man 27 might be pretty good, or at least not horrible? Shouldn't truly bad scores be saved for rubbish such as Ninjabread Man and things for the NGage?
I'm not saying that money can't buy some reviews, but look at EGM's Dan Hsu; the man fought the law (Ubisoft dollars) and he won.

Bad scores should be saved for games that deserve them, and as I recall Assassin's Creed got a combined score of 81 at Metacritic (for both systems), which means the majority of the reviews said it was good, and it was average, at best. Saving up the vitriol for crap like the N-Gage is not even a question. If a game is bad, reviewers should feel free to call them on it and not many seem to, for whatever reason.

And I don't doubt there are people that hope overhyped games will fail and complain accordingly. We should still demand higher quality reviews from the gaming journalist sector, since it is well needed at this point. Some games are going to pass, no matter how good or bad they actually are, just because they were released from a big studio.

I guess I don't have as much faith in journalistic integrity these days, especially when advertising is introduced. It has happened in virtually every other niche media review journalism world, and it certainly happens here too. The lines between actual journalism and out and out advertising are being blurred, more and more.

 

[Chewster]

I think the argument is of the form: Yes, but in this particular review he let his personal attack on Nintendo and Fighting games in genre interfere with any possible satire/criticism of the specific game itself, which is what we really tune in for.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you gentlemen.

I will concede that this week was a touch weak when it came down to actually discussing the game, as much as the points about fanboys he brought up needed to be addressed. Next week will be better, I figure.

TheEscapist is pretty damn cool, I must say. Though as someone who posts here regularly, and subscribes to the newsletter and reads the articles, I wonder if my opinion is objective or not.

I think Yahtzee's style of satire tends to make him immune to the, "You gave our game a bad review so we're pulling your funding," schtick... and I mean even on the level of the Escapist itself. I feel like if the Escapist was getting money to push a game, and Yahtzee dismantled it, then there would be little repercussion. TheEscapist can just say, "He does what he does! We can't control it!"

Take for instance Peggle and Pop-Cap games. Have you all noticed that TheEscapist has Pop Cap game banner ads on the site? I'm sure it's not because the admins are Peggle fans, rather they are getting a stipend for pushing it.

If anything the negative press was GOOD for Pop-Cap games, as I'm sure none of us had heard of it before the review.

Well, as a games reviewer, he has his shtick like you said, and I'm sure the high level of cynicism turns some off of it. Personally, this is why I like it. As much as he tends to overlook the good elements of a game, it's good to be very critical of it's faults, especially if we want to see less filler and more quality, something the industry seems to be lacking these days.

The Escapist is in a good position since publishing digitally generally means the cost to produce the reviews and info is cheaper and so as much as they are dependant on advert revenue, it is (I think) to a much lesser extent then say a magazine or television show. And at this point, Yahtzee has brought the Escapist so many extra pageviews, to censor him would be certain death. After all, he could just post the reviews elsewhere. So I guess the freedom he has is good, provided he keeps it simple and sticks to attacking bad games.

And this is true, negative press can sometimes work in favour of those being attacked.

 

[VeryOblivious]

Nobody has accused him of not being a real reviewer.

I've read frequently in other reviews that kind of accusation. In the "positive" manner: "He just rants, he isn't a real reviewer. He's just there to make us laugh", and in the negative, it's so much and I'm so lazy...

 

[DonPauliani]

Has anyone else noticed just how goddamned more violent Yahtzee is in this review? God, do i love it. Oh, and I'm comment 666, mmmmm.

 

[flak_towers]

Posting just to make the numbers less demonic.

Oh and the review was amusing too.

 

[Giygas]

Has anyone else noticed just how goddamned more violent Yahtzee is in this review? God, do i love it. Oh, and I'm comment 666, mmmmm.

OH GOD, YOU ARE POSTER 666

OH GOD OH GOD

 

[Zeriercahl]

What I don't understand is this whole "fanboy" thing.
What I mean is, it seems like Yahtzee and everybody else is saying you like the game a lot and are a fanboy or your a normal person and find the game mediocre, which is what he is saying SSBB is.
I like SSBB, no need to get into why here, but I feel that many people who don't like it aren't giving it a good enough chance (Yahtzee included.) What's so wrong about liking some Nintendo characters? I undertand Yahtzee doesn't like them but do I really have to be labeled a "fanboy" if I think Kirby is cool? It's just kind of ridiculous to me, that I am excited about a game with a bunch of different characters and crossovers from different series, something that rarely happens with video games, and be stigmatized as being too into it, or something like that.
On the one hand I can agree with Yahtzee that Nintendo aught to make some new characters. But on the other many people (myself included) want to see the further adventures of (Insert favorite Nintendo character here.) If this makes me a fanboy then whatever, I'm a fanboy, fine. All that means to me is that I really like something. Why is this bad? It's not, but why don't people get it? I guess it's just because some people havn't had the same experiances with these characters and video games as others. I grew up with Sonic. I got the shoes, the comics, even the Spegetti-O's. When I see Sonic nowadays he means something to me. For others that character can be Mario or Link or whoever.


Anyways, although I'm a big Super Smash Brothers fan, I'm not offended by the review just because Yahtzee didn't like SSBB. A lot of people don't like SSBB, that's fine. What pisses me off though is that everyone that does like it is labeled a "fanboy." That's bullcrap.
I am not a Nintendo fanboy. I like Nintendo and I think they're a standup company that's leading the video game industry in new directions and their games are usualy of high quality. They have a bunch of characters that many people are attached to, some people more than others. Super Smash Brothers is a good game series that many people enjoy weather they love Nintendo and their characters or not and the fact that the game's depth extends beyond the game itself is not a bad thing, and it's not right to bash the players who enjoy this depth.



In conclusion, (tl;dr) I'm not a fanboy but I love SSBB. However, being a "fanboy" isn't a bad thing.

 

[Another Fan]

You know what? I'm a big nintendo fan. And fanboy, obviously, as I did defend the name and love Super Smash Bros. Brawl. But! I found this review, as quite expected, funny, not that mean at all really and all the points are just matters of taste really.

At the beginning, you could tell it wasn't gonna give Brawl a gold star or anything. The fact that he did compliment the spirit of the spectacle was good enough for me.

I can't see eye to eye on all points of the review. I sort of missed why you would have to run through every level twice, besides the labyrinth.

Anyway, I thought the review was rather charming, despite being a rabid nintendo fan. Nintendo fans who get really offended by this and bother Yahtzee for it, are not only way too defensive, they are also overly antagonistic.

Anyway, yeah, I totally signed up for an account simply to say all that. Didn't really read all 669 comments, though, so hopefully all the hate died down after the first page.

Edit: Just read the above post. Uh, hm. I never minded the term "fanboy". Not that negative a term really. Unless you have some wicked associations. Fanboy, a fan who is so fanatical that they enjoy in a childlike fashion, arguing with people who aren't fans, accepting all flaws within the game of said fandom, but not of other's, etc.

Edit Edit: This is fun. I looked through the review again, and you know? Yeah, nintendo fans, there's seriously nothing to get offended about here.

 

[pootzer]

SPEAK FASTER - your youtube reviews were so much better when we had to hang on your every word just to understand what the feck your were saying.

 

[Jambe]

What pisses me off the most about this game is that the mechanics are actually quite good. If the Nintendo dillweeds would flex their game-making muscles in non-technical arenas by oh, I dunno, MAKING A NEW CHARACTER OR UNIVERSE ONCE IN A WHILE, YOU FREAKING IMBECILES... ahem, then perhaps I could start giving more of a shit.

 

[The Thief]

[Nerd Rant]

I don't really understand people's hatred for staple games. Using a formula that works along with classic characters isn't the plague people make it out to be. Staple games are just there to lay the foundation, giving the fan base a comfort zone. New and original games are still being made, and many with good quality.

As for the staple games that aren't the best quality, usually the fans will play it anyway just because they love the characters/formula. Of course they will overhype it, because they have an attachment to the series. So long as the next staple is better it's forgivable. It's the same as watching a tv series; you'll forgive a crappy episode if you enjoy the series but enough crappy episodes and you stop watching.

I think the hatred is more for the fans, which build up a lot of unnecessary hype for some of the more mediocre games. But fanboys screaming "10/10" isn't a good enough reason to call a mediocre/decent game or its series garbage.

And to say that staple games are all the same with minor variations is just not true; Some of the best games ever were staples, like FFVII, GTA 3, and OoT.

[/Nerd Rant]

Well that's just how I see it. Any thoughts?

 

[Uszi]

I think you become a fan boy when your love of a game leads to defend it to such an extent that it is almost like a pet belief.

What I mean is, generally you're willing to accept any evidence what-so-ever for why your game is good, and whenever someone says that it is not, you spend 1,000% more energy trying to defend it from attack.

So I'm sure to non-fan boys, and in that case I mean players who have NOT played all three Smash Games, players who have NOT necessarily mastered the mechanics of the earlier games (and for heaven's sake, players who don't even know what wave dashing is!), then I'm sure that OUR defense of SSBB is irritating in the way that a biologist might be irritated with someone defending creationism. Fan-Boys like their game, period, and there is no way to convince them otherwise.

... Which, personally, I think is the formula to create a 700 reply, 20 page long discussion. Have people troll, and provoke fan boys, who will inevitably bite the bait and fight with you till the ends of time. Hell, they'll probably fight among themselves YEARS after the trolls leave.

Has anyone else noticed just how goddamned more violent Yahtzee is in this review? God, do i love it. Oh, and I'm comment 666, mmmmm.

Unfortunately, you turned out to be 667. Not quite as evil, but good try!

 

[Uszi]

[Nerd Rant]

I don't really understand people's hatred for staple games. Using a formula that works along with classic characters isn't the plague people make it out to be. Staple games are just there to lay the foundation, giving the fan base a comfort zone. New and original games are still being made, and many with good quality.

As for the staple games that aren't the best quality, usually the fans will play it anyway just because they love the characters/formula. Of course they will overhype it, because they have an attachment to the series. So long as the next staple is better it's forgivable. It's the same as watching a tv series; you'll forgive a crappy episode if you enjoy the series but enough crappy episodes and you stop watching.

I think the hatred is more for the fans, which build up a lot of unnecessary hype for some of the more mediocre games. But fanboys screaming "10/10" isn't a good enough reason to call a mediocre/decent game or its series garbage.

And to say that staple games are all the same with minor variations is just not true; Some of the best games ever were staples, like FFVII, GTA 3, and OoT.

[/Nerd Rant]

Well that's just how I see it. Any thoughts?

I'm sure a study some day will uncover the "interweb phenomena," where in if two people hold fairly close to neutral view points, and one is slightly more negative and the other slightly more positive, when one expresses their view then the other is instantly polarized.

Ahem:

#1: I love North Atlantic Cod.
#2: FUCK ATLANTIC COD! Pacific Cod is a masterpiece!
#1: WHY DO YOU HATE NORTH ATLANTIC COD! You troll!
#2: You fan boy!

Here, person one uses the terms, "I love," which immediately forces person two to polarize their opinion.

Obviously person one probably doesn't really "love" Atlantic cod, in so much as they say, 'love their mother/father' or 'love life,' and was exaggerating their view point.

Obviously person two doesn't hate Atlantic cod completely, but in order to make their protest heard then they have to shout it.

It's sort of like, if fan boys use a megaphone to shout their opinion of a game, then you MUST use your own megaphone to be heard. Otherwise you will be written off and ignored.

 

[Ishinken]

I just love Uszi's explanation. It's so true. And sad.

However, on topic, Super Smash Bros. I liked the first one. The one to gamecube was not as good. It was pretty much a sloppy game with too many loose ends and what were all the statues and rewards for anyway when there were so many and you were all like "wth more of this scrap" each time you got them anyway.

Super Smash bros is indeed definitly OVERRATED and that is why Yahtzee's review or "rant" is so good. Because it takes guts to point it out in this mainstream horde of slimy nintendo fanboys and to be able to handle all the low IQ replies and hate-mails you will get.

Super smash bros games are like 6/10 in score, fun, but not ever a top game. They are just not to be taken seriously since they are so messed up and still contain many bad characters. Like the one to gamecube, what a serious gag mess. Many pokemon characters and so many copies of the same characters. Not even a true nintendo-fanboy can agree that was a good idea.

anyway, Yahtzee continues to grow in my eyes since he has the balls to say what needs to be said about theese games.

 

[pkmnSilver]

Ignorance Is Bliss!

I'm not much of a fanboy and I hate the name Wii

 

[DantehMan]

Great Job all around from the one and Only Yahtzee,,, oh and to comment on another post,,, 666 isnt all that evil if you were to check up on it i think you will find 616 is the sign of evil.

Buts thats just me finding truth it what can only be best described a 'Sceince Fiction',,, damn Bible

Again Great work Yahtzee I was sat watching this in a quiet office which was a mistake when GAMETRADERS ROBINA came up swiftly followed by GUY'S HOUSE, Hillarious!

 

[techno_alf]

Was it purposely made 4 minutes 20 seconds long on the week of 4/20?

 

[stompy]

Was it purposely made 4 minutes 20 seconds long on the week of 4/20?

Probably not.

Uh, why don't we keep this thing going. I believe a few people are interested in this thing hitting 1000 posts. It would an interesting spectacle, no?

- A procrastinator

 

[pkmnSilver]

Was it purposely made 4 minutes 20 seconds long on the week of 4/20?

Probably not.

Uh, why don't we keep this thing going. I believe a few people are interested in this thing hitting 1000 posts. It would an interesting spectacle, no?

- A procrastinator

Its already the most commented article.