4/23/2007: Philips CD-i: Jigsaw, Link: The Faces of Evil, Merlin's Apprentice, Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon

Let me know what you think about my reviews.
Gamer

4/23/2007: Philips CD-i: Jigsaw, Link: The Faces of Evil, Merlin's Apprentice, Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon

Postby Gamer » May 30th, 2007, 3:03 am

[QUOTE=PSXferrari]Hey, crappy system or not, keep those retro reviews coming Critic.  I personally picked up a CD-i a couple years ago just to try out the Zelda games (and already knowing what mess I was getting into) and Hotel Mario. And seeing the hilarious Zelda cutscenes alone is worth the money and probably has to rank as the most unintentionally funny moment in gaming.
[/QUOTE]

That reminds me... Why is that users give high marks to a game merely because it's inadvertently humorous? For instance, House of the Dead 2 with it's heinous voice acting and Night Trap, a game that consists of many scenes that play out in a Dragon's lair style meaning trial-and-error instances galore, are both awarded an A on this site.

If you think about it, a plethora of B- movie thrillers also satisfy in such a manner thus giving panegyrics to such budget styled games is a fundamentally flawed way of reviewing.



m0zart1
Posts: 3117
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

4/23/2007: Philips CD-i: Jigsaw, Link: The Faces of Evil, Merlin's Apprentice, Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon

Postby m0zart1 » May 30th, 2007, 4:09 am

[QUOTE=Gamer]If you think about it, a plethora of B- movie thrillers also satisfy in such a manner thus giving panegyrics to such budget styled games is a fundamentally flawed way of reviewing.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm... I don't see the flaw.  Because a lot of B-movies are available to satisfy the same urge, it's not ok to take the presence of it into account in a video game, either for the good or the bad?  I don't get that.

The goal of the reviewer is to say whether he enjoyed the experience or not, and provide a justification for why.  The goal of the reviewer is not to pretend it wasn't enjoyable because the fun or humor or whatever may have been unintentional.  So what?

Reviewing games should be first and foremost about whether it was fun to play and an overall good experience.  If that's partly due to the sense of unintentional comedy, so be it.  Ignoring that aspect when it is something many would legitimately enjoy would be the "fundamentally flawed way of reviewing."  And if some gamers don't enjoy that kind of thing, well that's also why the information is in the review, isn't it?

User avatar
VideoGameCritic
Site Admin
Posts: 11014
Joined: April 1st, 2015, 7:23 pm

4/23/2007: Philips CD-i: Jigsaw, Link: The Faces of Evil, Merlin's Apprentice, Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon

Postby VideoGameCritic » May 30th, 2007, 4:13 pm

[QUOTE=Gamer]
That reminds me... Why is that users give high marks to a game merely because it's inadvertently humorous? For instance, House of the Dead 2 with it's heinous voice acting and Night Trap, a game that consists of many scenes that play out in a Dragon's lair style meaning trial-and-error instances galore, are both awarded an A on this site.

If you think about it, a plethora of B- movie thrillers also satisfy in such a manner thus giving panegyrics to such budget styled games is a fundamentally flawed way of reviewing.
[/QUOTE]

I certainly do NOT give out favorable reviews merely because of the inadvertent humor!  I think you'll find a lot more D and F games with inadvertent humor than A titles.  As the last post mentioned, my grades are based on the enjoyment of the experience.  That's not to say that inadvertent humor can't add character to a game, but it's certainly not a major factor.


Return to “Review Feedback”