A nation that doesn't understand games

[Tokuda]

My point is that our preconceptions play a large part in how we appreciate things. Humans are humans, and I refuse to believe that the Japanese for example are in any fundamental way different to us.

But more importantly I don?t see why anyone is arguing about this at all. If we (as a group of people in this forum) were completely satisfied with Western gaming, we would, we wouldn?t spend all this time buying/playing/talking about import games. We are the enlightened few, but you can?t blame the masses. They are not all stupid, just ill informed.
Send them to this site for some education, I say.

Soi- All good points mate. Personally I`d give chess a 10

I never blamed the masses though- more the people who claim to know better when in fact they don`t recognise skill-based, old school games as well.

But like Brats said Viv la difference

[Tokuda]

I'm surprised that you can't appreciate that many people would simply not get on with the Gun Valkerie controls. Personally I found them fine, but I can see how many people would find them awkward, therefore I dispute what you are implying that reviewers that berated GV for its controls are ignorant. They are simply expressing a valid opinion that is shared by many.

yeah, of course I appreciate this.

But surely a better reviewer would state that they do take getting used to, rather than simply calling them ****? If this is the case than they are ignorant, as its their job as a reviewer to play the game properly (although, I do appreciate also that they have to write the review for particular audiences).

Still, a good review for say a mag like GamesTM would maybe say that the controls are hard to get used to, but with time and persistence, the game can be good (or great depending on what the reviewer thinks) to play. I wouldn`t begudge them marking down the game for its inaccessibility as this is something that would particularly concern most that read GameTM. If they did this, this would be fair, but what is certainly not fair is saying the controls are bad and unbalanced.

[Brats]

what is certainly not fair is saying the controls are bad and unbalanced.

Well, in typical fashion I'm going to have to disagree with you there again m8. Good controls are not something that are the same for all people. For example, I found the controls for MGS bloody awful and if I reviewed the game I would state as such. I know I'm in a minority, but in my opinion they ruined the game (along with those bloody codecs). I did persevere and play through to the end, but at no time did my hatred of the controls disipate. I could play it through 100 times and my opinion would not change. Am I ignorant or do i just have a different and equally valid opinion?

I'll bet that hundreds of people that played GV and disliked it would be the same. As I said before, there seems to be this attitude that if players only persevered a little bit more, they'd all come to the same conclusion, whether it be about GVs controls or game genres in general. I don't believe that's the case at all. You could give my wife GV to play for an infinite amount of time and she'd still think it was ****.

You'll see hugely different opinions on here about all things from SMS's camera to Project Gotham's handling. I love both of them, but many do not. However, I don't consider anyone who has the latter opinion to be ignorant.

Quite simply, saying GVs controls are bad and unbalanced is a perfectly valid argument and is quite fair. I don't concur with that opinion, but I can easily respect it.

[Tokuda]

Obviously for many games there will be disputes on the controls, and how good/bad the controls were for a given game- for example- I too like you wasn`t too keen on the MGS2 controls.

However, I would still say that some games are different.

I`ve yet to see or hear of anyone who actually gave the GV controls time and came to the conclusion that they were ****. From what I`ve read and heard, its only those who were a little more impatient and didn`t give the game enough time that came to the `the controls are ****` opinion.

Its one thing saying the controls are tough to get used to, but its quite another to say that the controls are **** in black and white. (and if I was reviewing MGS2, I would at the very least allude to differing opinions on the controls- again I believe this to be the job of a skilled reviewer rather than stating their opinions as fact).

[Mayhem]

By the same notion on GV you can also insert Metroid Prime. People were expecting FPS controls and when they didn't get them (because you can't play the game properly if you did have them), the whinging started and claims that it wasn't as good. People misunderstood the nature of the game that it isn't a FPS, more a FPA where the use of a freeview camera isn't as important. Personally I had no problems with MP's controls. Okay in the beginning I pressed the wrong button fairly often (X for Y etc) and getting used to switching the equipment, but with time it all fell into place and became quite natural and instinctive. That's an example of a control system that works brilliantly but takes time to master. Others (and yes I didn't like MGS's layout all that much either Brats) are just a complete pain from start to finish regardless of familiarisation...

[Tokuda]

exactly Mayhem-

I believe there is a clear distinction to be made between games that have bad controls and those that divide opinion. IMO, if a reviewer believes a gme to have bad control, but many others don`t, its his/her duty to state in the review something along these lines rather than simply give their opinion as fact.

[Brats]

But a review is an opinion, not fact. If I were to review MGS, I would describe the (imo) poor controls, I wouldn't bother stating "of course, some people have no problems with the controls, so it might be just me".

Looking at this from the other way, many reviews of Metroid Prime didn't mention that a lot of gamers have had issues with the controls. If we use your argument, these reviews failed in their duty and were ignorant of those players by stating the controls were great as being fact.

Reviews never need to represent the views of all opinions, just the opinion of the reviewer.

[Treble]

Good controls are precise, accurate, malleable....GV was a poor example, as the controls are all of the above, but are just very hard to get used to.

It's like driving a car and flying a helicopter: one's gonna be a hell of a lot less complex than the other, but they both perform their duties remarkably well.

[Streets Of Rage]

I just thought id make a point after reading the Gamesmaster (a very mainstream mag i think you'll agree many front covers of wrestling games and gta etcetc) review of Ikaruga, the game scored 90% is the first thing i'll say, they also talked about the changing of colour and the system of being black and white, doing double damage or taking more time to kill an enemy, the review also mentioned the game required alot of dedication to become good at and wasnt for everyone they also said it was an ultimately rewarding experience. there wasnt much mention of the chain system but for a mainstream mag it was as good as review as i have ever seen, anyone have opinions on this?

[Brats]

Good controls are precise, accurate, malleable....GV was a poor example, as the controls are all of the above, but are just very hard to get used to.

It's like driving a car and flying a helicopter: one's gonna be a hell of a lot less complex than the other, but they both perform their duties remarkably well.

It's more than that though, they have to be intuitive. Intuitivity is a very personal thing.

[Tokuda]

Maybe we see reviews as having very different purposes and we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I understand that reviews are indeed opinion, but surely publications should understand that when they review a game and speak of their opinions as fact (especially on games which are especially contentious), these opinions are potentially disingenuous. There surely needs to be a measure of balance within the standard review format (as opposed to something like Famitsu which allows 4 different reviewers who can offer their pure opinion on the game).

Too often I see my people (including my friends) decide not to buy a game because a publication has offered a strong opinion on the title.

I agree with you that a review doesn`t necessarily need to cover all differing opinions, but it needs to show some respect to when the reviewers opinion would plainly be in the minority. (For example, a review simply stating that Primes controls are terrible would be a bad review, because it is clear that this isn`t the majority opinion).

EDIT- Not necessarily only what I said about balance, but a review needs to be well argued, but I fail to see how anyone could convincingly argue that GVs controls are bad.

[Treble]

It's more than that though, they have to be intuitive. Intuitivity is a very personal thing.

I disagree completely: controls should become intuitive once mastered. It's the length of time it takes, and whether you take to the controls in the meantime, that determines personal preference.

Good controls are good controls, whether the individual likes them or not.
From a reviewer's POV, he/she should explain the fact that the controls may take time to become second nature, or even that some people will never like them, no matter what. The best reviews, though, recognise good control methods, irrespective of personal taste.

[Brats]

Maybe we see reviews as having very different purposes and we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I understand that reviews are indeed opinion, but surely publications should understand that when they review a game and speak of their opinions as fact (especially on games which are especially contentious), these opinions are potentially disingenuous. There surely needs to be a measure of balance within the standard review format (as opposed to something like Famitsu which allows 4 different reviewers who can offer their pure opinion on the game).

Too often I see my people (including my friends) decide not to buy a game because a publication has offered a strong opinion on the title.

I agree with you that a review doesn`t necessarily need to cover all differing opinions, but it needs to show some respect to when the reviewers opinion would plainly be in the minority. (For example, a review simply stating that Primes controls are terrible would be a bad review, because it is clear that this isn`t the majority opinion).

I don't think you give the majority of readers enough credit m8. Most will obtain reviews from a number of sources and guage the title on that. Either that, or they learn which magazines or websites they agree with the majority of the time and listen more to those.

If they don't then that's not the fault of the reviewer. If I reviewed MGS and slated its control system which meant that some people didn't buy the game, I'd have no problem sleeping at night. The people who didn't buy it should have read some more reviews to make a decision. A review isn't a buying guide, it's a review. The two things are similar, but with distinct differences.

If reviews should always respect the majority view, the any review which praises GV's controls is ignorant based on your assumption, because the majority of gamers probably do have issues with its controls.

I bet the vast majority of people would not enjoy my old friend Nosferatu. If I reviewed that, should I add on the end that most people will undoubtedly find it uninteresting? Should every arthouse film review mention in it that the majority of people will find it dull? Should every review of a Philip Glass album mention that its not for everyone?

Imo, not only do such comments sound awful, they only serve to confuse more than it helps.

[Brats]

It's more than that though, they have to be intuitive. Intuitivity is a very personal thing.

I disagree completely: controls should become intuitive once mastered. It's the length of time it takes, and whether you take to the controls in the meantime, that determines personal preference.

Good controls are good controls, whether the individual likes them or not.

Sorry m8, I couldn't disagree more . It's a fair point that controls can become intuitive over time for a certain group of people, but to suggest that good controls will eventually become intuitive for everyone is incorrect. There are some people that despite 50 driving lessons still cannot get to grips with driving a car (and they never will). These are not abnormal people, the controls are simply unintuitive to them. Personally, I find car controls very intuitive, but as I said, intuitivity is a very personal thing.

[Tokuda]

It's more than that though, they have to be intuitive. Intuitivity is a very personal thing.

I disagree completely: controls should become intuitive once mastered. It's the length of time it takes, and whether you take to the controls in the meantime, that determines personal preference.

Good controls are good controls, whether the individual likes them or not.
From a reviewer's POV, he/she should explain the fact that the controls may take time to become second nature, or even that some people will never like them, no matter what. The best reviews, though, recognise good control methods, irrespective of personal taste.

Exactly.

There seems to be some myth that a games controls need to be fast and immediete to the player. This is a complete fallacy IMO, and just because a games controls aren`t immediate doesn`t mean that they`re bad. I don`t see why gaming is particular in demanding immediete and obvious controls. The controls in GV were perfect for what they had set out to do.

Camps summed it up perfectly before-

GV was a master piece of design in terms of control layout - try boosting whilst dodging in 2 directions plus firing at an enemy using any other setup, you will find it impossible.

the simple fact is that mastering GV needs both skill and patience - you will not master this game's controls in the first 5 minutes of play.... however when the controls do 'click' you will find a game that is both a joy to play and controls as well as any 3d action shooter

I just hope that Smilebit release a sequel to GV using the same control method

camps

Once again, anyone who said GVs controls were **** hadn`t played the game properly, and were therefore ignorant- its as simple as that.