one year later reviews, tips/ideas?

Ri_Nollaig

Deleted User wrote: »

Dead Space, surely.

But +1 for this. Good idea.

I recently played through dead space and enjoyed it, didnt like the back tracking but over all it was a good game. Infact only reason I got it was because it was only 15eur, so +1 for buying games a year after they were released.

Another one for Spore here...
Fine example of a game that promised so much, I dont think I even played it since that week it came out. Infact I often look back at that now when ever I see a game getting hyped, its best to just ignore it all and wait a few weeks after its released (or year even)

Vegeta

Kinetic^ wrote: »

1 thing, don't do scores/percentages. They suck.

Weird I was thinking the very same thing when replying earlier.

James Howlett

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Assassins Creed I feel will be joining goldeneye and donkey kong country in a few years time where you look back on it and think 'How did I actually enjoy this back then?'.

I'm going to grab a PP7 Handgun (silenced) and shoot you in the back of the head, while your on the toilet, if I catch you giving out about Goldeneye again.

BlitzKrieg

s it set in stone that you'll only do a game roughly a year after their release? Because you could always the odd MMO to show how they've changed from their (usually buggy mess) start.

One year later is really only the name, it just sounds better to call it ONE YEAR LATER REVIEWS! rather then GOOD GAMES GONE CHEAP or something.

Originally got the idea cause I was so pissed at DICE and EA for releasing 1943 exactly a year after bad company came out and I picked up bad company just before it and a large portion of the multiplayer population jumped game.

Not to mention Red Faction 3 showed up a month later and put all the destructable enviroment element of bad company to shame.

RobertFoster

James Howlett wrote: »

I'm going to grab a PP7 Handgun (silenced) and shoot you in the back of the head, while your on the toilet, if I catch you giving out about Goldeneye again.

Have you played it recently? The goggles rose-tinted glasses do nothing...

humanji

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

One year later is really only the name, it just sounds better to call it ONE YEAR LATER REVIEWS! rather then GOOD GAMES GONE CHEAP or something.

Originally got the idea cause I was so pissed at DICE and EA for releasing 1943 exactly a year after bad company came out and I picked up bad company just before it and a large portion of the multiplayer population jumped game.

Not to mention Red Faction 3 showed up a month later and put all the destructable enviroment element of bad company to shame.

Well it's an excellent idea. Some of the review sites are slowly starting to do something similar. Gamespot, for example, occasionally update their reviews after the initial hype. So get your skates on! :P

RobertFoster wrote: »

Have you played it recently? The goggles rose-tinted glasses do nothing...

Hell I have and it plays just as good. The graphics are dated now, but the gameplay is still great. I dusted off the N64 and had a few mates over. Multiplayer still pisses over everything else out there. It's too much fun.

BopNiblets

GTA IV PC version was in December if that counts
Never finished it, never reinstalled it when I moved from Vista to Windows 7.
Fcuk off Niko Bellic.

Retr0gamer

humanji wrote: »

Hell I have and it plays just as good. The graphics are dated now, but the gameplay is still great. I dusted off the N64 and had a few mates over. Multiplayer still pisses over everything else out there. It's too much fun.

With the 2 FPS it runs at you might as well be playing a text based adventure with all the fluidity it affords in the single player game.

Sabre0001

Looking at the multiplayer side of games that have been out a while would also be very helpful. There are games that people have just moved on from while the likes of CoD4 and Halo 3 still have massive online communities (even within the lower ranks).

Gotta agree with Vegeta and Kinetic^ - no scores. They're pointless and often contradict the makeup of the review.

Some magazines do re-reviews...but I think they are afraid to go back on what they originally gave out.

Finally, you could team up with another person - not necessarily in a Devils Advocate kind of way but at least there would be two perspectives. You could do individual reviews and then a discussion piece on various aspects of both reviews.

OctavarIan

Scores aren't really needed for video but you'll lose readership if you don't have them on your text reviews.

Retr0gamer

You should take a look at gamespite. They do numerous retrospectives and don't have review scores.

Star Lord

Another angle for the 1 year later reviews is laptop gaming, as they're generally pretty underpowered compared to standard PCs, it'd be good to have lists of games that would run reasonably well on them.

Vegeta

Sabre0001 wrote: »

Finally, you could team up with another person - not necessarily in a Devils Advocate kind of way but at least there would be two perspectives. You could do individual reviews and then a discussion piece on various aspects of both reviews.

I think that is a very good idea and a positive thing to have in a review.

Gaming is so subjective, so the more opinions expressed the better.

DARK-KNIGHT

A GREAT IDEA HERE BLITZKRIEG! not everyone has cash to buy new games all the time and also very habdy for newbie gamers to see whats worth buying!!!!!

A1 to you good sir!;)

Sabre0001

I think this Uncharted 2 score debate shows a reason not to post scores - very subjective, the thread mentions that Uncharted 2 was docked for things that Halo ODST was not and as I stated previously some review text can completely contradict the score.

But then again, scores give people something to debate (I'm sure IGN got some clicks as a result of the debate kicking off) and it gives lazy people something to flick to quickly...


Good luck

BlitzKrieg

personnally over on the film review board, when I give a review, I try to make it clear how I broke down the score. Mostly I do it out of 10, and I divide it up that 5 points go to what should work and 5 points should go to what is really good.

So in the case of games I would give a game 5 points if its bug free, stable consistent net code, tight controls well rounded content (decent length + features) and visually consistent.

Nothing amazing, if a game does all that and nothing more, then i'd give it 5/10

then the remaining 5 is for special stuff, essentially taking the above to the next level.

But I wont be using controls for this.


I've decided to do Left 4 dead as the first programme, mostly because I'll be playing it a good bit at the upcoming lanparty 2 so I'll prob bring along my camera and get a few quick comments from players about their opinions on the game after a year and the upcoming left 4 dead 2. Aim for a halloween release.

Then I'll do Red alert 3 after it After that I'll decide if its working or not to keep going and what games.

Going for the two above cause they are both pc and I havnt been arsed to really work out the cabling to record 360 footage without a capture card (I've been told you can run the 360 straight to a video camera if it has comp in/out which my one does. So I might opt for that.)

Sabre0001

Good stuff. CU@LAN (from Saturday night ). Also, talk to PPC about the setups for recording XBox footage (I have to too!); he'll be the guy recording the SF4 matches.

Ross_Mahon

I think this is a great idea, Has there been any requests for a general gaming video section? It would be nice to share montages and reviews with other gamers.

Overheal

Add world of goo to the list.