MLB '08: The Show Review

[mattyg]

Quote: Originally Posted by Oldschool17

Matty, In your opinion who benefits most from the score any game receives from a reviewer? Gamers or Game Producers???

Reviews are written for the gamers, not to stroke the egos of gaming companies. If their game gets a warranted positive score and that makes them happy, good for them. If not for reviews, someone curious about the title might not know how great RTTS is or how that online play is sketchy. But this review wasn't written to appease anybody and to imply so is flat out wrong.

On the one hand you're saying reviews do nothing but benefit the companies but like I said if you had waited for our review you would've seen online was still an issue, not bought the game and not given Sony your $60. But if you want to buy games on a whim don't complain that certain modes are "broken" afterwards.

In fact online isn't totally "broken." Some guys have had little or no troubles. But lets say the game gets seriously docked for bad online play to an 8 or 8.5. What's the big difference? Is that 1 point really going to be the difference between Sony-SD fixing online or not caring? If you think really it should be a 6.5 or 7 because of online, I don't know what to tell you other than I totally disagree as do plenty of others. There are a ton of great features of this game that make it worthy of a great score.

Considering the game got called out for weak online play I really don't get why this is even an issue...

[jim416]

Quote:

Reviews are important to the people who call the shots--->The Producers of games like The Show, Madden etc...You and I are irrelevant..When a Peter Moore can site meta-critic reviews to defend a game that has serious problems we then have to consider the impact that reviews have on the quality of games we get year after year...You have to look at what a review means in the grand scheme of things. Thats why I care about the review...I don't care about it for my own selfish reasons because I don't nee3d it to tell me whats good or not as if I was a lemming.

In the grand scheme of things. I only play baseball, period. I do look at gaming sites and look at the reviews of games. I see a LOT of games rated 5, 5.5, 6, even lower. I pass very quickly on these games. Write them off, actually. You feel that by giving it a crummy score will make the producers do more? Ever think crummy scores hurt sales? Less money for, let's just use SCEA, could mean that the game gets even less attention next year. Afterall, it IS all about the bottom line. Scores CAN make and break a game. Am I saying give a good score just because? Heck no. So give it a 6.5 because of the online problems (which some people say they aren't having). Then when people like me take a look at reviews and see this, I'll just pass on the game.

Reviews DO mean something. This game does NOT deserve to take a big hit soley because of the online problem. That's just my opinion.

We have been very fortunate to have very agreeable devs for this game visit the site, listen to us, add things (pats self on back for getting full roster control put it, even after having knock down drag out insults with the devs via PMs). This game is stellar, and the jump from last year, bumps and all, is astonishing.

But am I so foolish to believe that the devs are not pressured to make the game more "saleable" to the general public? Look at the baseball card thing with 2k. Guys are going gah-gah over it and the game is getting blasted by most people from the gameplay perspective. All the pressure to bear by gamers won't change somethings, as much as the devs may agree with us 1000%.

Nature of the beast. Sort of a double edged sword.

Game is a solid 9.

[SoxChamp]

Quote: Originally Posted by Oldschool17

Reviews are important to the people who call the shots--->The Producers of games like The Show, Madden etc...You and I are irrelevant..When a Peter Moore can site meta-critic reviews to defend a game that has serious problems we then have to consider the impact that reviews have on the quality of games we get year after year...You have to look at what a review means in the grand scheme of things. Thats why I care about the review...I don't care about it for my own selfish reasons because I don't nee3d it to tell me whats good or not as if I was a lemming. This is the game companies like EA, 2K and Sony play with gamers...They court many sites and play all these games to get great reviews or at the very least reviews that allow them to make alot of money from the herd that wait for a OS, IGN or other gaming site to review the game and tell everyone..."Its safe ...go buy the game"...Personally I'd rather waste $60 and make my own mind up as opposed to allowing someone else to think for me...I value the feedback and opinions but at the same time I want to form my own. When reviewers allow their own personal bias to or determine whats important or not about a game we have a problem...Lets face it..A review as we know is a glorified opinion of one man who has a license to write for a gaming site. Not knocking reviews..But thats all they are to me...They are a form of entertainment to me..But on a larger scale they have a huge impact on how companies like EA serve gamers. I think all reviews would be more accurate w/o a score...We don't need scores do we?..In fact who do you reaqlly think benefits from the score?...Gamers??...Wake up people..Not gamers. I don't think alot of reviewers understand the importance of their own reviews and how they may or may not shape the games that companies produce..If you can't see that then your naive to the whole process. BTW..How much do you ding a game when it has the same problem 2 consecutive years in a row...Is that more or less of a ding??? I listened to a Podcast of Peter Moore and when the interviewer addressed the inherent problems and dissatisfaction with Madden whatya think was the first thing he said..."Well, the mete-critic reviews have never been higher"...Now please lets not sugar coat this...Gaming companies are duping us left and right because we allow it and we act like we should be grateful that they made a game for our lowly selves. IMO a 8 or 9 for this game tells Sony that its ok to have bull$hit online play because overall gamers don't care..Well thats not exactly true because even gamers who will never play online should care about the overall quality of the game. If there was a game killing franchise bug many of you would be crying bloody murder and I'd be supportive of that.

This is getting old. You are now repeating your same opinions, over and over and over again, but are accomplishing very little. It's now bordering on trolling. For someone who doesn't care about reviews, you sure are spending alot of time talking about it. And you still haven't addressed how and why you think 30% of the review should have been based on online play, a mode that is never the bread and butter of any sports game to most people.

This game is a solid 9.

[Oldschool17]

Quote: Originally Posted by SoxChamp

This is getting old. You are now repeating your same opinions, over and over and over again, but are accomplishing very little. It's now bordering on trolling. For someone who doesn't care about reviews, you sure are spending alot of time talking about it. And you still haven't addressed how and why you think 30% of the review should have been based on online play, a mode that is never the bread and butter of any sports game to most people. This game is a solid 9.

If this same exact game had GREAT online play but unplayable FRanchise/season modes what would a fair score be?????

[Oldschool17]

Quote: Originally Posted by jim416

I We have been very fortunate to have very agreeable devs for this game visit the site, listen to us, add things (pats self on back for getting full roster control put it, even after having knock down drag out insults with the devs via PMs). This game is stellar, and the jump from last year, bumps and all, is astonishing.

Funny thing...where are those devs now to field questions about the online play?...Devs do the same thing almost every year..They show their faces daily before the game drops..Then as soon as that bad boy hits the stores...They are O-U-T

[jim416]

Quote: Originally Posted by Oldschool17

Funny thing...where are those devs now to field questions about the online play?...Devs do the same thing almost every year..They show their faces daily before the game drops..Then as soon as that bad boy hits the stores...They are O-U-T

No, you're getting ridiculous. Why don't you PM them? These guys work their arses off and don't want to hear dead horses beat like you are. They show up and somebody will be asking them "how do you hit", "why aren't there more balls thrown in the game".

They have been more than receptive to us. I, myself, hope they are sunning on a beach somewheres and not worrying about some cry baby. But that's just me.

[Oldschool17]

Quote: Originally Posted by jim416

No, you're getting ridiculous. Why don't you PM them? These guys work their arses off and don't want to hear dead horses beat like you are. They show up and somebody will be asking them "how do you hit", "why aren't there more balls thrown in the game". They have been more than receptive to us. I, myself, hope they are sunning on a beach somewheres and not worrying about some cry baby. But that's just me.

Name calling would not be appropriate communication on OS forums...wouldn't you agree?

But lets not go there...Answer the question please...If Franchise/Season mode locked up and was unplayable what would the score for this game be???

[jim416]

Reading comprehension. I didn't call YOU a cry baby. Read it again. It was rhetorical because that's exactly what the devs would get from a bunch of members. Notice I said that I had PM'd them? Not start a b#@ch session on the boards with guys who have been more than kind to us.

The dead horse was directed at you though.

Why don't you start a I DISAGREE WITH THE REVIEW BECAUSE OF ONLINE thread?