The Ketchup Chip Episode

[fishbang]

The weekend edition of In-Game Chat is now available (http://ingamechat.net/audio/IGC20081205.mp3).

We’ve had a strong need lately for a unique northern perspective on gaming and worldly things alike and, thankfully, Canadia was kind enough to dispatch one of its chief emissaries in answer to our call. The one-and-only Skwish (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/member.php?u=44) joins us in-town and in-studio this weekend. He was kind enough to bring ketchup chips and to participate in the usual cross-border discussions about the names of food and the color of money that we love so much. In return we took him to eat at a place where they say yee-haaw! on your birthday. Sorry bout that.

It seems we also had a strong need to let things run a bit silly toward the end of this hour. There’s great stuff going on here about games and things - Fallout, ratings systems, Valkyria Chronicles, the usual. We even find time at the end for the sadly neglected mailbag. But it was strangely difficult to stay on track with a guest in the studio, though it may also have had something to do with the NyQuil.

[Spigot]

Mmm... Ketchup chips. I always forget about just how limited you guys are in terms of the batshit insane chip flavours we take for granted up here.

It's nice to see Valkyria Chronicles finally getting some love on the show.

I look forward to hearing what my Canuck brother has to say. I hope he comported himself with charm and grace.

[Gerbs]

I bought a large bag of Lay's ketchup chips as a direct result of listening to this episode. Maybe you should see if Lay's wants to become a sponsor?

[kyrieee]

Do you guys view review scores as an attempt to quanitfy some sort of objective overall quality of the game, or a reflection of personal like/dislike for the game?

For me it's the latter. People who give Fallout 3 7/10 aren't wrong they just don't like it as much. I didn't enjoy BioShock for 1 second. I can tell that it's a well made game but that doesn't mean I'd rate it high

I mean, if I were to review a movie or a book I wouldn't rate them highly just because they're not broken. I can dislike 'good' movies, but it seems less accepted with games

Not liking a game because of it having obvious flaws doesn't lead to interesting discussions ("the camera sucks" - what's there to talk about?). Dislike for something that's not obviously bad is much more interesting to talk about.

Mirror's Edge's DLC maps are really inspired by defrag maps.
1st person platforming in abstract levels with floating platforms pained with single colours. Hmm.... see for yourselves

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAVsJI2PCiM&fmt=18#t=3m25s

[Iron Past]

Do you guys view review scores as an attempt to quanitfy some sort of objective overall quality of the game, or a reflection of personal like/dislike for the game?

For me it's the latter. People who give Fallout 3 7/10 aren't wrong they just don't like it as much. I didn't enjoy BioShock for 1 second. I can tell that it's a well made game but that doesn't mean I'd rate it high

I mean, if I were to review a movie or a book I wouldn't rate them highly just because they're not broken. I can dislike 'good' movies, but it seems less accepted with games

Not liking a game because of it having obvious flaws doesn't lead to interesting discussions ("the camera sucks" - what's there to talk about?). Dislike for something that's not obviously bad is much more interesting to talk about.

I'm right there with you; it's one of the reasons I dislike "scoring" a game, I'd prefer a "buy, rent, skip" grade, really, but even that is fairly subjective. For the record, I think Fallout 3 is a good game, but not nearly as good as, say, the hosts think.

It's the same thing with GTA IV: I can recognize it is an accomplished game, in narrative and ingenuity and from a technical standpoint, but couldn't stand playing the fucking thing. How would I score something like that?

[danielOut]

Interesting discussion here on reviews. I suppose we should probably go over our feelings on them at some point; I'll try to weasel it in to the show tonight if we have time.

[el cheezer]

Wall of text warning!

I may be giving reviewers too much credit here.

Personally, I believe that the discordance between numbers and the actual comments in reviews is a deliberate attempt by reviewers to serve both the people that only browse scores and the people that actually read the reviews. It also shows that reviewers are finally realizing that they have to use the numbered score as a tool instead of seeing it as a hindrance.

Someone that only browses scores will see that 8 or 9 as a recommendation to get the game. It says "it's not perfect, but you'll have a lot of fun with it." Meanwhile, the person that reads the review will read about all the game's flaws. The reviewer lists the flaws to appease the forum poster that will call them out on ignoring the bad camera. However, the reviewer will also list the flaws because to some gamers, a bad camera will actually break a game, regardless of its other qualities.

A written review doesn't accompany a numbered score to explain it. The number is there to give you an insight into the reviewers personal taste. It's there to tell you how much they personally enjoyed the game, regardless of the flaws listed in the review. In a world where short reviews are the rave, a number is a much more effective way of conveying that.

The written review is there as the "buyer's guide" part of the review. It lists whatever issues they had with the game. The written review is there to tell you about the things that may keep you from having the same experience described in the numbered score.