- BeefieCheesie
- Rank: Metal Slime
- Member since: Mar 11, 2004
All About BeefieCheesie
Recent Blog Posts
-
11Aug 07
Why Review Madden?
In a few days Madden Football 08 will descend upon the masses and take all the money it can. Releases will be on every system known to man. Videogame websites and magazines will review the game. Their consensus: It's Madden, stuff has changed, stuff hasn't. Then they will proceed to give it a 9.0.
I'm asking: Why review Madden anymore?
What is the point of reviewing a game that comes out every year, almost exactly the same content wise. With a gameplay tweak on either offense or defense, animation revisions (maybe), some feature that should been in the game to begin with, and roster update. Its sixty bucks worth of retread, and yet it garners high scores every year. Why don't we stop wasting time reviewing the game that hasn't changed since the 16-bit era.
If EA did in fact make substantial changes to the franchise, that would be one thing. I would personally like to see pretty implementation of the ESPN license. 2K5 (may it rest in peace) has offered more ESPN integrated content than Madden has with the whole4 years its had with the license. A presentation change with the on-the-field gameplay would be great. It is still the same tired Mode 7 flip around every time the ball changes sides, kick return...on and on. How about some innovation? However, having done little to change the game as a whole, why should we bother going in depth on why you would want this game. You probably want it, you do want it if millions of copies are sold every year.
This goes back to the whole collective of people that bemoan Madden every year it comes out. Its nothing new, even this Editorial is in the same vein as 90 billion other opinions on the sports franchise genre. To this end, we understand that a game that is technically the same thing year in and year out, should be held to a higher standard if it is an annual event. Is this how review sites are tackling the sports franchise genre. Are they comparing this years Madden to last years Madden in terms of what it offers?... Or are they comparing them to other games in the same sport....or is it something entirely?
Regardless every year Madden shows up, is applauded for its awesome-ness, slapped with a good score....then the fan trades it in a few months later for a better title. But this is never considered in reviews.
How can we hold other franchises and other genres to standards that are not evenly held across the board? If a new Splinter Cell comes out, if it has any of the tired franchise traps in it; it receives a lower score and is harped on it reviews and podcasts. Its a benign example, but something that has boggled my mind as to why reviews are the way they are.
Madden has continually stifled any innovation in its series. It could be said if EA did maybe the best Madden ever, would there be any point to buying it again and again and again? Does it seriously take years and years to iron out a game on each generation of consoles, end with the culmination of the current generation and then move on to the new consoles?
My beef is with the reviews. There just needs to be a short sentence next to the title. "BUY" or "DO NOT BUY". This is how Madden should be reviewed.
-
1Jun 07
Note to Reviewers: Play the Entire Game!
How can "video-game journalists" compare themselves to actual journalists/critics when they can't even play an entire game before they review it? On top of that how can an editor let a review slip out into the masses when it is quite obvious that the review is a half-baked piece of trash? If it's clear that a reviewer didn't quite feel a game, that's fine, but to let that ONE review speak for an entire site/magazine/newspaper is horrible. Have another mini-review from another person at the bottom to at least give some context as to how a consumer might feel about the game/product.
Video-game reviews are more consumer reviews than actual critical reviews. It's only comparable to a movie/music review in that it boils down to the "You either want or you don't". However you don't see a movie review where the critic watched only ten minutes of the movie and made a snap judgement on it. That would speak poorly on not only the critic, but the entire publication, and their entire review basis. Game reviewers have to play the entire game, otherwise, what's the point? Too often, and especially on Internet sites, you have reviewers who play half the game, or the first few hours, and make a judgement on it. IGN's review of God Hand is a shining example of this: Chris Roper couldn't play the game, and reached a conclusion that the game was worthless. Instead of objectively reviewing the game, he let his frustrations fuel a veiled rant of why he didn't have the skill to play the game right.
A side note: enough with the niche "game journalists". Examples of this are: The old-school video-game guy, the 3-D gamer guy, the FPS adoring guy, the grizzled trade show veteran, the "video-games as art" guy, the "I'm a chick gamer" lady....on and on. How can you obtain objectivity if you get "I LOVE ALL THINGS HALO" guy to review a...lets say a 2-D sidecroller? Of course he/she is going to hate the game, it's not a FPS! They will decry how the gameplay is soo yesterday, and grow frustrated by its limited mechanics, what have you. On the other hand giving that same game to the old-school reviewer warrants a useless praise filled rant of how awesome the game is: compared to games from 20 odd years ago. The perfect sampling of this is the website 1up.com, with its almost cartoonish amount of gasbag stereotypes who use the word "like" and "you know" like they were going out of style.
There has to be a balance met with all this buffoonery. Unlike movies and music, games are a huge investment of not only money, but time. Beyond the whole "you either want or you don't" of a review, a little spice doesn't hurt a review, but opinions do. If video-game magazines and websites want journalistic credibility then they need to objectively review stuff. Save the over-inflated opinions for the fan boys at your local EB Games.
-
18Apr 07
How to Make a New Contra...ideas.
�
�
I want to make a new Contra game, for the modern day audience.� The problem is How to do it right in 3-D.� How can I retain the feel of Contra, without messing it up?� Shattered Soldier, while great, was in the right vein of a proper Contra in 3-D.� It also shared the same director of Contra III and Contra Hard Corps.� But it didn't bring anything truly new to the franchise.� Would a more free form non-linear progression work throughout the game.� Or shoud it adhere to the 2.5-D rules?� I find that Hard Corps strayed a bit from the linear Contra formula.� It wasn't leaps and bounds, but more different paths to take. � It was also a constant boss battlin'-a-thon.� Would that translate well to 3-D.� The overhead stages would be fine in 3-D, and would probably be in the same idea as God of War and devil may cry.� Probably fixed camera, since the side scrolling stages would be fixed as well.� As much as I want to engross the player in the world and the mythos of the new Contra game, I have to think about gameplay, and staying true to the Contra "vibe".� The player will need to be able to see everything going on around them, so then would a free form 3-D camera be a better fix?� Then we get in to auto-aiming, which I think any Contra fan would scoff at, and as a player I'm not a big fan of constantly mashing a button to lock on to various targets.� I also don't want to make it a rail-shooter, where the game just throws stuff at you.� But you constantly recognize where something's going to come from.� Older Contra's had stuff coming at you from everywhere.� Could we switch between linear 3-D levels, but move the camera from 2-D side view during certain parts of a level and zoom in and move behind the characters for other (3-D) parts.� I would more than likely have the Gun selection/Item boxes from Hard Corps.� You would still shoot floating boxes, for fan service, but the different items would be different weapons to different characters. �
My Recent Reviews
Some people just don't have opinions. Like BeefieCheesie.
BeefieCheesie's Feed
BeefieCheesie does not have any recent activity. What a slacker! Maybe you should send BeefieCheesie a private message and ask, "Where are you hiding?"
