Summer Storms: The NCAA Release Story

[brk1078]

GIVE IT FREAKING TIME. And those who think that the defense sucks, USE SLIDERS. goshdarnit.

[ASB37]

Quote: Originally Posted by brk1078

GIVE IT FREAKING TIME. And those who think that the defense sucks, USE SLIDERS. goshdarnit.

This would be all good and dandy.....if the CPU sliders actually worked. This is yet another thing that absolutely boggles my mind. How can this get past testing?

[Cebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by brk1078

GIVE IT FREAKING TIME. And those who think that the defense sucks, USE SLIDERS. goshdarnit.

Clever

[GoVols1985]

Quote: Originally Posted by ASB37

This would be all good and dandy.....if the CPU sliders actually worked. This is yet another thing that absolutely boggles my mind. How can this get past testing?

Yeah, I agree, that is pretty bad.

[yamabushi]

Chase,
I could care less about College FB, video or otherwise (playoffs please), but I do peruse the forums and read about 90% of the front page articles. And its hard not to notice what appears to be a pro EA, pro NCAA slant.

Just my 2c.

[ChaseB]

Quote: Originally Posted by thmst30

Chase we love you man, keeping it real in this thread and taking everything in stride. Now as for the complaints about the OS Review score. The thing about reviews these days that I find so wrong is that, as you stated, its ONE persons OPINION. Thats not what a review should be, it should hardly touch on the writers opinion at all. A review is a place to put down the straight up facts about a game, both the positive and negative, and then let everyone decide for themselves if they will buy it. EVERY review site out there today is guilty of loading up the reviews with their OPINIONS and leaving many FACTS out. Leave your opinions at home or post them in the forums, for the review we just want the writer to lay it all out on the table and thats it. Again, its nothing against the reviewer or OS, everyone out there is guilty of destroying what reviews are supposed to be about.

Well I don't want to completely take this in a reviews direction, but what you bring up is something I've thought about many times. I'm really OBSESSED with preview guidelines and review guidelines because it is a lot of what I do here (though I didn't edit the NCAA review because I was at E3), and in general yes they are a big part of traffic and the site's credibility -- though I'm not entirely in agreement with that for obvious reasons.

However, I tend to not agree with what you're saying because while I do agree you need to post facts and all that, most of the fact stuff should be done via previews and also you can always go to the official site to get that information. I don't think it's a reviewer's job to put forth every little fact because then that's consumer reporting, that's not a game review. You have to connect with the reviewers and know their tastes. Maybe you tend to agree with one reviewer, but not another -- I think that's a good thing.

Plus it's hard to say what's a fact or not a fact at points if you get into that territory. Something gameplay-related might be a positive to one, but not another or whatever. Obviously you point out glitches when you find them and all that, but a simple checklist of facts isn't what a review should be about. It has to be interesting to read and you need to bring a perspective to the table that helps readers understand what you're trying to say. Basically, I think a good review makes someone realize why they're enjoying a game by bringing up something that maybe they didn't notice before. They think about it for a bit and then maybe you remember that review and understand what the reviewer was speaking about. If you're simply trying to make someone think why they should or shouldn't buy a game then that's an outdated way to think. You bring up forums etc. and people can talk about the game in that way, and look at previews, and videos, and developer interviews and so forth. It's not like the old days where you didn't see these games and thus waited for reviews to see if games were worth it. Nowadays a review has to do more than that to me.

I'll just briefly say I am in the boat of more opinionated previews as well. Not falling into reviewing the game, but being negative if there's negatives, don't simply just write one sentence about them or pretend like it will be fixed in a later build. Also N'Gai Croal wrote a great piece about previews in a recent Edge which pretty much sums up how I feel about previews, in a nicely articulated fashion.

[ChaseB]

Quote: Originally Posted by yamabushi

Chase, I could care less about College FB, video or otherwise (playoffs please), but I do peruse the forums and read about 90% of the front page articles. And its hard not to notice what appears to be a pro EA, pro NCAA slant. Just my 2c.

Do you see that for all EA games, or just the football ones at OS? Obviously we aren't going to artificially be harder on EA just so no one thinks this is an issue because then you're not doing your duty as a writer, but I'm just curious in general.

[thmst30]

Quote: Originally Posted by ChaseB

Well I don't want to completely take this in a reviews direction, but what you bring up is something I've thought about many times. I'm really OBSESSED with preview guidelines and review guidelines because it is a lot of what I do here (though I didn't edit the NCAA review because I was at E3), and in general yes they are a big part of traffic and the site's credibility -- though I'm not entirely in agreement with that for obvious reasons. However, I tend to not agree with what you're saying because while I do agree you need to post facts and all that, most of the fact stuff should be done via previews and also you can always go to the official site to get that information. I don't think it's a reviewer's job to put forth every little fact because then that's consumer reporting, that's not a game review. You have to connect with the reviewers and know their tastes. Maybe you tend to agree with one reviewer, but not another -- I think that's a good thing. Plus it's hard to say what's a fact or not a fact at points if you get into that territory. Something gameplay-related might be a positive to one, but not another or whatever. Obviously you point out glitches when you find them and all that, but a simple checklist of facts isn't what a review should be about. It has to be interesting to read and you need to bring a perspective to the table that helps readers understand what you're trying to say. Basically, I think a good review makes someone realize why they're enjoying a game by bringing up something that maybe they didn't notice before. They think about it for a bit and then maybe you remember that review and understand what the reviewer was speaking about. If you're simply trying to make someone think why they should or shouldn't buy a game then that's an outdated way to think. You bring up forums etc. and people can talk about the game in that way, and look at previews, and videos, and developer interviews and so forth. It's not like the old days where you didn't see these games and thus waited for reviews to see if games were worth it. Nowadays a review has to do more than that to me. I'll just briefly say I am in the boat of more opinionated previews as well. Not falling into reviewing the game, but being negative if there's negatives, don't simply just write one sentence about them or pretend like it will be fixed in a later build. Also N'Gai Croal wrote a great piece about previews in a recent Edge which pretty much sums up how I feel about previews, in a nicely articulated fashion.

OK, I see your side of it as well. I can certainly live with that. I actually just re-read what I typed and it came out all wrong.