Zero Punctuation: The Witcher

laikenf

New member
Oct 24, 2007
764
0
0
fugori said:
Why is it that whenever an individual disagrees with Yahtzee's assessment of a game - or his methods - they fall back into the same old rhetoric about these being entertainment pieces instead of actual reviews? In what way is an opinion piece, or something that is in some way humorous, not a valid review? If we are to hold games up to the same standards we do film and literature, then we should abandon this silly notion that game reviews require this objective, removed, scientific analysis complete with pointless numerical score. An impression is still a useful tool, and you should never use a single review as an excuse to buy or not buy a game. Instead, think about how the reviewer experienced the game; think about your relationship with that reviewer, what their interests are, how they approach games, and how that differs from or is similar to your own. When you read (or in this case watch) a critic's work for a long enough period of time, you understand how similar to your different from your own preferences they stand. This is the true benefit you gain from a review, not an 88.3/100.

I'd never claim to speak for Yahtzee, but in my opinion, his reviews are every bit as valuable and legitimate as any. More so, even, than most reviews from major publications, where you're constantly wondering what the critic's relationship with the advertiser is, or what kind of editorial pressure they might be under to deliver higher scores in order to stay afloat.

Yes, they have the added benefit of being entertaining, and yes he most certainly doesn't present every possible angle for you to consider, but that's the thing about art - it's a personal experience. Why should anyone bother to try to fight through dozens of hours to find a way to enjoy something that clearly does nothing for them when there's so much more out there that does, or might? There's not enough time in the world to play every game, read every book and watch every movie.

And to echo other posters here, I imagine that I might like The Witcher for many of the reasons Yahtzee doesn't. I may not. There's no telling until I get the opportunity to play it. But my enjoyment of the game wouldn't change how I feel about game reviews any more than this post will prevent another few dozen people from posting about how they only watch ZP for laughs.
Well said. But you have to understand that a lot of people (me included) go to review sites to get informed on games we consider to purchase, so while it's nice to read reviewers that inject a sense of humor and some sarcasm to their articles (believe me, Yahtzee is not the only one) the bottom line is that WE WANT INFORMATION, unbaised, legit information; and that's something that Mr. Yahtzee should dedicate a little more time to because when you look past the jokes and the sarcasm you're left with a very uncumfortable sounding human being that seems to be bothered by EVERYTHING ANY game throws at him, and very little information (proper info) about the game at hand; that, as I said in a previous post, could be VERY MISLEADING.
 

Rubberband

New member
Jan 23, 2008
3
0
0
People who like RPG's are like people who enjoy buggery. It feels great but your cock smells like shit and there's a risk you might get a piece of sweetcorn jammed in the end of it.

We RPG'ers accept the dodgy interfaces, complexities and insipid dialogue because they are part of the genre. I'm sure Yahtzee could review the hundreds of barbed implements that can be inserted into bodily orifices and vigorously shaken about and have more relevance than his RPG reviews.

If you don't like Planescape Torment, Fallout, Knights of the Old Republic or FFVII, don't review RPG's unless the sole reason for doing so is comedic value, rather than a real review couched in wonderful, hilarious metaphors.

Edit: To add to the 'relevance' debate too, I have found all of Yahtzee's non-rpg reviews to be 100% bang on and funny. I found Mass Effect and The Witcher to be funny, but they are critical of the quintessential nature of RPG's, which is counter-productive to a review, but not to comedy.

Edit2: The irony is that the humour is so good because it's invariably true. The danger in reviewing for humour alone, especially relying on metaphor and sarcasm, is that it runs the risk of Red Dwarfitis where every week we can predict that every comparison of gameplay to a will be about a bodily function or a sexual act. Teh funne is that Yahtzee invariable nails the truth of the game and then makes it funny. Without the truth, it will fall flat.
 

Ghandi 2

New member
Dec 5, 2007
33
0
0
Quistnix said:
Dexter111 said:
Especially stay clear of highly medalled PC-RPG's with complexity and a great interesting story like Baldur's Gate, PS:T, Gothic-Series, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout 2, The Witcher
I seem to recall Yathzee saying positive things about Fallout and Torment, so maybe he doesn't hate rpg's in general, just the bad ones.
He just put Planescape as an example in the ME video. He said on his blog that he never got past the first section of that game either. I think he pretty much hates RPGs, he just hates western RPGs a little bit less.

The end bit was not funny at all, I don't know what you guys are on.
 

fugori

New member
Jan 23, 2008
8
0
0
laikenf said:
Well said. But you have to understand that a lot of people (me included) go to review sites to get informed on games we consider to purchase, so while it's nice to read reviewers that inject a sense of humor and some sarcasm to their articles (believe me, Yahtzee is not the only one) the bottom line is that WE WANT INFORMATION, unbaised, legit information; and that's something that Mr. Yahtzee should dedicate a little more time to because when you look past the jokes and the sarcasm you're left with a very uncumfortable sounding human being that seems to be bothered by EVERYTHING ANY game throws at him, and very little information (proper info) about the game at hand; that, as I said in a previous post, could be VERY MISLEADING.
Thanks for considering my point.

I suppose my rebuttal would be that the very idea of a review being objective is a flawed one. We shouldn't treat games like we do new species - to be picked apart and examined, then to describe in a dry, soulless, complete manner.

A full-length commercial title would demand several pages of text for a full, fair picture to be obtained - that is, for the reader to completely understand everything the game has to offer without actually playing it himself.

Am I alone in thinking that this lofty goal is not only unreasonable, but disturbing? The established art forms understood a long time ago that description only goes so far. As does entertainment. A personal impression is not a bad way to go about things, and neither is it the only way, but it is A way, and one that brings something to the table that the opposite side of the spectrum desperately lacks and needs.

Think about it this way: if your reaction to this review is "I loved this game and can't believe that Yahtzee is misrepresenting it so!", then for a minute imagine the reasons that Yahtzee has provided. Obviously you would have a rebuttal to each of them, but I think it's absolutely fair to say that many people would not, and would in fact line up much more with Yahtzee's line of thinking than yours or mine. Now imagine that you're that person. Hasn't this been a helpful experience?

Personally, I have yet to play The Witcher, but I think this review has informed me just as competently as to the content of the game as any of the lengthy previews I previously checked out. With both bits of information in hand, I feel like I know what The Witcher is about. I feel intrigued. Not convinced, but I'd certainly like to play the game. I don't agree with Yahtzee all of the time - just like I don't agree with my favorite film reviewer, Roger Ebert (le gasp!) all of the time) - but I do understand his position, and it informs my choice, and entertains at the same time.

Asking game reviewers to be robotic summarization machines is born from a deep misunderstanding of what games are all about, in my opinion. That's all.
 

p0nda

New member
Aug 25, 2007
21
0
0
I didn't really get the point of the Painkiller bit, but it brought me to a realization, so I am grateful for its inclusion. The revelation? Yahtzee sounds like Rik Mayall when he was Rick in The Young Ones. No wonder I approve of him so thoroughly.
 

fugori

New member
Jan 23, 2008
8
0
0
Rubberband said:
If you don't like Planescape Torment, Fallout, Knights of the Old Republic or FFVII, don't review RPG's unless the sole reason for doing so is comedic value, rather than a real review couched in wonderful, hilarious metaphors.

Edit: To add to the 'relevance' debate too, I have found all of Yahtzee's non-rpg reviews to be 100% bang on and funny. I found Mass Effect and The Witcher to be funny, but they are critical of the quintessential nature of RPG's, which is counter-productive to a review, but not to comedy.
As far as the evidence that exists is concerned, I wouldn't say that he hates all RPGs at all. The vast majority of the individual games he reviews are ones that he hates. It's a part of his... shtick. I mean, how many FPSs has he reviewed negatively? Are we to assume that he just doesn't like FPS's and therefore shouldn't review them?

I agree that the humor works because its founded in truth. Definitely.
 

DarkElfa

New member
Dec 26, 2007
24
0
0
He really needs to do a CoD4, just because I want to hear something bad said about it form someone who matters, lol. Great review of the witcher though.
 

defcon 1

New member
Jan 3, 2008
458
0
0
The guys negative, but thats what makes him funny. After watching his reviews we go onto real sites and look for legit reviews, unless of course you're that thick. He gives his honest opinion at the conclusion, such as Mass Effect and Mario Galaxy. nuff said about that...
*The following might not apply to all*

I played a bit of the Witcher and I thought it was alright (not amazing). It did exadurate on the Action part of it

If you're really skilled, click twice
YES!!! AWESOME!!!

I didn't find it that hard to play but one thing that just pissed me off is how the inventory screen has no organization. It gets hard to find stuff after awhile. I guess I'd play every other game on my list before playing this. The voice-overs made me almost piss myself.
 

AsbestosKidney

New member
Dec 5, 2007
17
0
0
It seems like The Witcher is a game people either love or hate.. I've not seen a whole lot of people take the middle ground. Personally I love it, even if the female models in the game make you question the quality of the developers' sex life if they couldn't complete the production without constantly having a screenful of tits in front of them...

I thought the game was quite intuitive though, but maybe it's because endless chains of mindnumblingly unintuitive RPGs have brainwashed me beyond saving :p

And yeah, I'm also one of those guys who liked Planescape: Torment due to my masochistic desire to be drowned in dialogue

P.S. the Painkiller thing was hilarious
 

viciousmaniac

New member
Oct 24, 2007
18
0
0
Rubberband said:
We RPG'ers accept the dodgy interfaces, complexities and insipid dialogue because they are part of the genre.
Since when are these detriments (save for complexities, assuming they aren't of the needless kind) "part of the genre"?

By this logic, I have to accept bishie poofs as "part of the genre" of JRPGs, even though I clearly remember a time when JRPGs were more about better things than adolescent otaku wankfests.

Think about for example Ultima VI, where the Avatar meets the Gargoyle population for the first time.

In that game, your character has terse, blunt encounters with the NPCs whom are obviously upset at your slaughtering of their kin, should you choose to stop to talk to them. You realize on your own that the Gargoyles, however angry and paranoid, are not quite the menace that ponce Lord British made them out to be. It proves exciting from both a story perspective and a gameplay one.

Had that been, say, Mass Effect, every one of the red skinned bastards would've droned on and on and on and on and on and on in psuedo-deep babble in a manner so annoying and condescending, it'd make me want to kill them all over again, ruining the whole point of the sequence. And Lord help me if it were a modern-day JRPG game instead.

In my view, the Yahtzee RPG reviews are just upsetting complacency in a manner the fandom doesn't want to hear.
 

AsbestosKidney

New member
Dec 5, 2007
17
0
0
Even though I'm a fan of The Witcher, I agree with Viciousmaniac ... I look through all the dodgy parts of many RPGs because I enjoy the rest of it, and I guess it's because I've grown too used to it all. I don't really like people who claim they're better for enduring uintuitive interfaces and at times dodgy game mechanics. And the standard has definitely fallen... Game developers are too busy jerking off to their own work and they seem to forget the point.

Even if stupid game mechanics are part of a game, the fact is that they shouldn't be. If you can enjoy the game in spite of it, good for you, but you still have to accept why other people don't share your joy. And when I listen to Yahtzee's review here, I can understand where he's coming from even if I don't see things the exact same way... I like controversial opinions no less for being different than my own.

Speaking of storylines, I think that many modern first-person shooters have much tighter storytelling than their contemporary RPG counterparts..