Leaderboard

I thought I would give us all the opportunity to see what planforms we at VGR tend to play our games. You obviously don't have to, but please share what you play on in the pole and tell us why in comments below.

Fair warning to all, this is going to be a long (and somewhat bias) post, much like my first one about the games review process here. I doubt I can change anyone's minds, but I would hope my perspective provides some unique insights. In terms of...? Yes, of course we can. I won't lie, as a games reviewer myself, I'd struggle to review a lot of genres. I will say that many don't stay in their lane, but then - as you'll see below with Dean Takahashi - there may not be the best writer available to cover something. Citation needed. I know people will point to Dean Takahashi's Cuphead attempts (as a reminder, he was not its reviewer and does not primarily play platformers) or Polygon's Doom First Impression, and they were indeed attrocious, but beyond that you don't have much evidence to tar even half of games journalism with the same brush. That said, games journalism hasn't really ever had much in the way of integrity. The industry was very saavy to catch on to this early on: game magazines were nothing more than a front for marketers, and it took over a decade before you started seeing negative reviews that used scathing language because it wasn't just a puff piece. It wasn't until things like Jeff Gerstmann's firing from Gamespot over a negative Kane & Lynch review that the public started taking ethics in games journalism seriously. It's around that time that I'd say a lot of non-gaming stuff came in as print media was on its way out, and to compete game magazines (I use the word 'magazine' in the sense of a website too) had to fill up space with opinion editorials. This isn't to say it should always stay this way just because "that's how it was." Obviously there'll always be room for improvement, and it should be improved upon... if it lasts, which I honestly doubt. I feel the next generation of games coverage will only make the same mistakes as the last because it's what's expected. One final point for this particular question is one of the first posts I made on this forum, re Cyberpunk 2077 reviews and the review process. It talks about an ideal world, which games journalists don't - and cannot so long as it's as cutthroat as it is - live in. No, games journalists don't get a ton of money for their work. Freelancers usually have to build up a portfolio which they won't make any money on, and even then they may need to do a free trial (probation) before someone will buy an article. Since the blogger boom there's too many who do it for eXpOsUrE and it works, meaning the rest of us who want to be paid get told to blow off. No it isn't. Games journalism's decline in quality is for the most part for the following reasons: There's too many freelancers and too few in-house writers. [Redacted as it got too heated. My point is that it's simply cheaper for editors to write half-cocked reviews or get a freelancer to do it cheaply rather than pay an annual salary. This isn't always the case, thank goodness, but it's quite common especially the higher up the food chain you go.] Not enough time. A lot of this is on developers/publishers/PR agencies who don't send review copies within a respectable amount of time. A lot of it is down to backlog (again, see the above about being understaffed), and editors not properly prioritising articles and reviews. Filling. To say there's more games and delivering content, there's not a lot more to say about it. So we go back to what games journalism came from: dressing up advertisements for clicks. The cloak and dagger of PR does not help one iota, either. Citation needed. I get the frustration at articles, writers and sites that home in one one disagreeable aspect of the game and harp on about it for the entire article, but again, to tar the entire industry with that same brush just doesn't help with discussion. I won't lie, I would like to have seen the article but I imagine it would only be as venomous as your first post here. It just seems like you've come to a games jouralism site's forum to vent. I would certainly hope that if you continue to post here, you ease into the place as I did. In spite of all this, I would like to welcome you to VGR. Thanks for what has been cause for quite a hearty discussion so far.

Sorry, I hit the "enter" button by mistake before I put in everything. It should be fine now.

Not gonna lie, a lot of good stuff there. A Plague Tale: Requiem, Hellblade 2, Starfeild, Avowed and Quake peek my interest

I'm locking this thread. This is just the same people dancing around and repeating the points over and over to farm posts.

After working in IT, I realized a lot of PC gamers aren’t really that knowledgeable in computers, but act like they’re computer geniuses. They’re pretty clueless on computer stuff outside of gaming, because they tend to hunk that if something isn’t catered to gaming, it’s useless.

He's a legend in the game already as far as I can tell. Such kind of record isn't something you'd get easily without proper commitment to the game.

Yeah. The Bayo 2 game case literally comes with free Bayo 1 download code since it was on PS3, 360 and PC. Not a lot of nintendo fans would have played the first game before B2 came out.

Around the same price like £50 for both games(they come in a bundle).

Try to play Bayo 1 first if you can. It comes free with Bayo 2.

It's a fact that can't be disputed in anyway. It even happens to me when I sleep for too long, my back will hurt like hell.

You are not alone. I hated that game with a passion. It somehow looked worse than the original with really muddy, dull graphics and it looked somebody had done something private to the camera lens. Pretty surprising considering all the recycled assets, like bosses from the first game we saw die coming back for no reason and with no explanation. The game just lazily executed and felt sluggish and uninspiring to play. You can tell Capcom, likely surprised by Devil May Cry's success, just shat something out quick to cash in.

Personally , I feel devil may cry 2 is one of the worst game sequels and was in no way as good as the predecessors. It was available on PS2 when I played it.

As someone who played all of them except FF11, I don’t think there really is a “true” Final Fantasy. Even if you go back to the Nintendo era games, they changed a lot around too. Even going from FF1 to FF2, there’s a lot of gameplay and story elements that were vastly different. Sure they were both turn based and top down, so at face value they look the same. (It also doesn’t help that if you played the NES versions of both, and your main FF1 character was a warrior, the same character sprite.) Then you get into the battle system and things get very different. They jettisoned the traditional level up system with something akin to Elder Scrolls, where each stat is individually leveled up for each character, the same goes with each character’s individual spells. There are no classes, no crystals of the elements. What summons? That’s just with the first two games. So I agree with you, I don’t think there’s a “true” Final Fantasy game if they change it up every entry. Fans claim FF9, but that’s mostly because it’s like a callback to all of the previous 8 games.

FFXV is basically a mainline FF game in name alone(well there's also that it was originally going to be a spin off). Like it shares some terms with prev ff games like names of items and chocobos and stuff but that's about it, the gameplay, setting and exploration couldn't be any more different. Not that it makes it worse of course.

i'll just list some recent ones i can think of : Project Cars 3 -> Went from a semi sim racing game to a more arcade style racing game. Yakuza like a dragon -> Went to full turn based rpg route instead of the usual beat em up style gameplay. Witcher series -> Went full open world with the third installement instead of the more semi linear style from the previous 2 entries. Assasins creed Odyssey/origins/valhalla -> Went from a "stealth" experience to a full blown action rpg. Grand theft auto 3 -> Ditched the top down view of the first 2 games and it's spin off for an full 3d open world Fallout series -> Went from top down turn based rpg to 3d first person rpg Zelda series -> Name whatever game you want here, especially the first and second game are a good example how different they are Starfox Adventures -> Pretty much had nothing to do with the on rail shooter that was the first game. Resident Evil -> Where do you even begin with this one, after the third game each game feels like it could be a new ip. Banjo and Kazooie nuts and bolds -> I like this game but it's a car creation game instead of a platformer. Metroid Prime -> yeah this needs not explination I'm sure i could list atleast 15 more but i'll leave that up to others. There's a ton of obscure franchises i can think off like front mission went from tactical strategy rpg to a full blown action game with mixed results.

In answer to the actual topic, Some Game's journalists ae journalists first and gamers second, but I don't really feel that's that's the most most of the time, especially these days There is of course gamergate and controversy's like the Kyne and Lynch 2 and Driver 3 situations that shed light into flawed structure of games journalism by being too dependant on the cooperate game's industry itself for survival, but especially since gamergate I fel things have change a little. I see outlets, like IGN for example, being a lot less reserved and more prepared to bad behaviour from the industry in recent years. As for a journalists gaming skill, I really don't think they need to be MGL to have a worthwhile opinion on a game. On the contrary, I actually believe it's better for journalists and reviewers especially to be closer to the ground as they an offer an option that is on the level of the typical gamer. They have to know what they are talking about, yes, but that doesn't mean mastering a game. There are exceptions, of course, where it is reasonable to have the journalist be on another lever like if they report on E-Sports or if they are putting out tech advice (Looking at YOU The Verge after that embarrassing PC Build Guide video). But overall I do feel that journalists being around the level of regular gamers is a good thing and I do not believe that most games journalists are worse than us. I've written a few reviews in my time (that can call be found on the forum), and I'm I'd never claim to be that good at game, but that doesn't mean I cant put together a respectable opinion.

What I don't understand is why everyone realizes there is an addiction problem and sees a parent trying to get help needed, but when the WHO labels 'gaming disorder' a disease on another thread then you have the urge to resist it when the problem is being recognized and being made aware of on a global scale.

I feel the need to correct you a little bit here. Microsoft and Sony are not developers of games. In terms of Microsoft's Xbox and and Sony's PlayStation, they play the role of Games Publishers. A game publisher is to a game developer what a record label is to a recording artist, they invest into the developer to give them funding to support the game development and whatever else the developer needs to create the game. A publisher will also provide specific services such as promoting the game, obtaining whatever licences the game may need (like to use copyrighted music and branding, for example), manufacturing the physical copies and getting the game onto store shelves. Unless a game is independently published (often called an "indie" game, that's where term comes from), a developer and publisher, despite thier association, will be two completely separate companies. More specifically to Sony and Microsoft, there is not actually a single game you listed that was developed by Sony or Microsoft. They were the publisher, not developer. On the Sony side; Spiderman was developed by Insomniac Games Uncharted 4 was Developed by Naughty Dog Horizon: Zero Dawn was Developed by Guerrilla Games On the Microsoft side; Minecraft actually started out as an indie game developed by Mojang Games. It only became a part of Microsoft's brand when Microsoft bought Mojang Games in 2014. Gears of War was developed by Epic Games (I linked a Wikipedia page this time because Epic's own website is also a storefront, so this will actually give a better insight into thier history as game developer) Halo was developed first by Bungie then by 343 Industries. There are some expectations, like Microsoft did (at least part) develop Microsoft Flight Simulator and Sony do have thier own development studios under the banner Worldwide Studios that have developed games like Gravity Rush, but most exclusives games these days are actually made by developers that exist as separate companies to the console brand. Unless you're Nintendo, obviously, they still make most of thier own games.

I haven't felt that in over 6 years now because I could barely get enough sleep. It's been ages I had more than 3-4 hours sleep every night.

The only people that have any interest in NFT'S are those who want to sell them on for profit, therein lies the problem. Nobody really wants these stupid things so they have no real value, hence their tanking big time. Think about it, if they were a good investment why is everyone trying desperately to sell them when their value has sunk to the bottom of the barrel? Now would be best time to buy and hold onto them right? WRONG! Their pushing them on because they know that's the only they could possibly get anything back on their investment, NFT's are done! This is before we address the other issue of vulnerable these scams are to other scams. Look what just happened to Seth Green. His Bored Ape NFT was stolen from right under his nose and he just had to fork out another $300,000 to get it back or he would risk loosing the rights to use it in a TV show he's producing (LINK). I got zero sympathy for him or anyone else who's lost out to these scams because we've been warning them for months.