The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ok seeing as this gets deleted on the official site i think ill post it on here.
A few readers have noticed 2 big mistakes in 2 games that were reviewed this month[issue34]which has bought up the question, do the staff even play the games they are reviewing??
The first was Headhunter which they gave 5.8. They complained about the graphics[funny seeing as they look like Prince of persia sands of time, which they said looked great]. But the big problem was this, 'The odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action' Now anyone who has played Headhunter will tell you that the Bike bits were taken out of the game.
The seconed one is Madden 2005 which they gave 8.5. Saying that there was LIVE play for up to 4 players, again this is not true as the Pal version does not support live play[this is the official mage and only reviews Pal games]. The question again did they even play the game??
Im sorry but how bad can it be if a mag is having to cut corners in their reviews?? How bad is it when Amuze[makers of headhunter] have to wright a letter on the OXM site about the false comments in the review?
I dont know any other mag that does this sort of thing?
Like i said if this sort of thing is posted on the official site they just delete it with instead of being grown ups and dealing with the matter properly.
A few readers have noticed 2 big mistakes in 2 games that were reviewed this month[issue34]which has bought up the question, do the staff even play the games they are reviewing??
The first was Headhunter which they gave 5.8. They complained about the graphics[funny seeing as they look like Prince of persia sands of time, which they said looked great]. But the big problem was this, 'The odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action' Now anyone who has played Headhunter will tell you that the Bike bits were taken out of the game.
The seconed one is Madden 2005 which they gave 8.5. Saying that there was LIVE play for up to 4 players, again this is not true as the Pal version does not support live play[this is the official mage and only reviews Pal games]. The question again did they even play the game??
Im sorry but how bad can it be if a mag is having to cut corners in their reviews?? How bad is it when Amuze[makers of headhunter] have to wright a letter on the OXM site about the false comments in the review?
I dont know any other mag that does this sort of thing?
Like i said if this sort of thing is posted on the official site they just delete it with instead of being grown ups and dealing with the matter properly.
Page:
And considering that's the 'Official' XBOX magazine, I think there should be the odd sacking. You don't bite the hand that feeds you - without those game developers there would be no magazine.
to$$ers
to$$ers
For those who didn't get a chance to see the original thread before OXM axed it, here are three snips of background. Bear in mind, though, that the thread ran to 16 pages with more than 12,500 views and scores of posts.
AMUZE’S LETTER:
Dear Official Xbox Magazine (UK),
As a fiercely independent games developer, we totally respect the right of reviewers to make harsh but heartfelt criticism of games released to the public. But like all rights, this comes with responsibilities.
Foremost of these must surely be factual accuracy. In your review of
Headhunter Redemption (Issue 34, October 2004), you claim that cut scenes "can't be skipped... Grrr!" This is incorrect: all cut scenes in the game are skippable. Grrr, indeed.
More mysteriously, you conclude your review by stating that "the odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action." There are no biking sequences in Headhunter Redemption: a fact that would be apparent to anyone who had actually played the game.
Naturally we would prefer everyone to appreciate our game as much as many other reviewers have done, but we will always try to learn from
well-informed criticism. It is far harder to accept ill-informed,
unprofessional journalism.
Perhaps in future you could show us, other developers and your readers this simple courtesy: if you can't be bothered to play a game, don't bother to review it.
John Kroknes
Philip Lawrence
THE REVIEWER (ANDY IRVING)’S REPLY:
I'll reply to this thread to set the record straight.
The review score HH: Redemption received was an honest reflection of the quality of the game.
As for factual inaccuracies, things seem to have been taken out of context.
I stated that cut-scenes couldn't be skipped becasuse, in the review code we were sent, no amount of Start / A / any button pushing could skip the cutscenes.
And as for mentioning the bike sections, again I was referring to the cutscenes.
COMMENTS FROM gamesTM REVIEWER:
From personal experience on gamesTM, we've never reviewed code of anything before the submission stage... but then, that may be because we've never attempted to secure 'exclusive' reviews purely for the purpose of splashing it across the cover of the mag in a desperate attempt to push the sales up. I can understand the predicament that some mags put themselves in, but again it's all up to the common sense of the reader; the fact that everyone's scaremongering now because the concept of not reviewing boxed code makes mags look like a bunch of liars really does surprise me, considering I thought many people were aware as to how the magazine process actually works.
As for the stuff posted about the Headhunter review though... well, I'm biting my tongue, if only because it makes me angry that someone's clearly trying to turn things around and pin the blame on the developers when he's been caught red handed. Strange, considering that we got exactly the same code that they got... I could skip the cut-scenes in ours, even if I did have to sit through the first five seconds of it before the chance came. And the lack of bike scenes has been clear from the preview stage. Mmm... pork pies. My favourite type.
AMUZE’S LETTER:
Dear Official Xbox Magazine (UK),
As a fiercely independent games developer, we totally respect the right of reviewers to make harsh but heartfelt criticism of games released to the public. But like all rights, this comes with responsibilities.
Foremost of these must surely be factual accuracy. In your review of
Headhunter Redemption (Issue 34, October 2004), you claim that cut scenes "can't be skipped... Grrr!" This is incorrect: all cut scenes in the game are skippable. Grrr, indeed.
More mysteriously, you conclude your review by stating that "the odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action." There are no biking sequences in Headhunter Redemption: a fact that would be apparent to anyone who had actually played the game.
Naturally we would prefer everyone to appreciate our game as much as many other reviewers have done, but we will always try to learn from
well-informed criticism. It is far harder to accept ill-informed,
unprofessional journalism.
Perhaps in future you could show us, other developers and your readers this simple courtesy: if you can't be bothered to play a game, don't bother to review it.
John Kroknes
Philip Lawrence
THE REVIEWER (ANDY IRVING)’S REPLY:
I'll reply to this thread to set the record straight.
The review score HH: Redemption received was an honest reflection of the quality of the game.
As for factual inaccuracies, things seem to have been taken out of context.
I stated that cut-scenes couldn't be skipped becasuse, in the review code we were sent, no amount of Start / A / any button pushing could skip the cutscenes.
And as for mentioning the bike sections, again I was referring to the cutscenes.
COMMENTS FROM gamesTM REVIEWER:
From personal experience on gamesTM, we've never reviewed code of anything before the submission stage... but then, that may be because we've never attempted to secure 'exclusive' reviews purely for the purpose of splashing it across the cover of the mag in a desperate attempt to push the sales up. I can understand the predicament that some mags put themselves in, but again it's all up to the common sense of the reader; the fact that everyone's scaremongering now because the concept of not reviewing boxed code makes mags look like a bunch of liars really does surprise me, considering I thought many people were aware as to how the magazine process actually works.
As for the stuff posted about the Headhunter review though... well, I'm biting my tongue, if only because it makes me angry that someone's clearly trying to turn things around and pin the blame on the developers when he's been caught red handed. Strange, considering that we got exactly the same code that they got... I could skip the cut-scenes in ours, even if I did have to sit through the first five seconds of it before the chance came. And the lack of bike scenes has been clear from the preview stage. Mmm... pork pies. My favourite type.
Here's people like Snuggly, myself and many other budding reviewers, wanting the chance to do it for a living, while Johnny Overpaid is sat scratching his ass when he ought to be writing about games.
I can't understand why people buy those magazines anymore anyway - all the reviews you need are on the internet, thousands of them. You're just getting ripped off for crappy demos and free chocolate bars.
I can't understand why people buy those magazines anymore anyway - all the reviews you need are on the internet, thousands of them. You're just getting ripped off for crappy demos and free chocolate bars.
lol nope as in MUST HAVE GAME!
thebestbit wrote:
> ahhhh i see explains why they made enter the matrix an elite game.
'elite' as in "seems like it was released at the same time as Elite"?
> ahhhh i see explains why they made enter the matrix an elite game.
'elite' as in "seems like it was released at the same time as Elite"?
ahhhh i see explains why they made enter the matrix an elite game.
thebestbit wrote:
> But OXM say they on review finished games, clearly this is not the
> case.
It's a typo: they only review Finnish games, the other reviews they just make up.
> But OXM say they on review finished games, clearly this is not the
> case.
It's a typo: they only review Finnish games, the other reviews they just make up.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
>
> If so this sucks ass, EA can f**k off if this is true.
hahaha :D
>
> If so this sucks ass, EA can f**k off if this is true.
hahaha :D
are there still problems with burnout 3 on live?
The US gets it but we don't.
I've just sent a message to EA telling them in more polite words to f**k off.
I was actually glad to see them announce LIve play on games, now I'm really not so sure. Their servers suck ass and they don't seem to realise that over here we do actually play other sports as well as football.
Was really looking forward to a decent golf game online, stupid f***ing EA, this has really pi**ed me off.
I've just sent a message to EA telling them in more polite words to f**k off.
I was actually glad to see them announce LIve play on games, now I'm really not so sure. Their servers suck ass and they don't seem to realise that over here we do actually play other sports as well as football.
Was really looking forward to a decent golf game online, stupid f***ing EA, this has really pi**ed me off.
Page: