Jump to content

Zero Punctuation (Hilarious) Game Reviews


sephfire
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Plus, K&L series doesn't really deserve good reviews based on those shenanigans a couple years ago... just saying.

Why? If Jeff Gerstmann can put that stuff behind him and give the sequel a fair review, why shouldn't anyone else. It's not really fair to the devs to hate on their game for something that was out of their hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not attacking the "little people" there (the folks who worked hard on the game), I'm attacking the people who were obviously in the position to cause Jeff Gerstmann to be terminated for stating that the game was not good. To me, that just means that the series was doomed from the beginning and should have been aborted rather than making a sequel.

This is all moot though, considering the first one sucked and caused an uproar in the gaming community over the Gamespot drama, and Yahtzee just performed a fatality on #2 :)

It's pretty unlikely we'll see a chart-topping K&L3, if we see one at all :-P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think it's unprofessional to give a game low scores without giving it a chance, just as much as giving a game high scores for big advertiser bucks. If you personally as a consumer want nothing to do with the series, fine, but for people whose job it is to review these things*, holding a grudge over that incident seems so petty. Especially since the man it personally affected has moved on to better things.

*not including ZP, who shits on everything regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think it's unprofessional to give a game low scores without giving it a chance, just as much as giving a game high scores for big advertiser bucks. If you personally as a consumer want nothing to do with the series, fine, but for people whose job it is to review these things*, holding a grudge over that incident seems so petty. Especially since the man it personally affected has moved on to better things.

*not including ZP, who shits on everything regardless.

Well seeing as I'm just a consumer and not a professional game critic, that doesn't really pertain to me, as I'm not particularly concerned whether or not my appraisal of a game/series is all that professional or not ;)

The way I see it is that the important people behind the series were trying to trick their consumers into thinking it was a good game when in actuality it wasn't. Thank goodness that people like Gerstmann are willing to stand up and be like "naw, this game sucks, I cannot lie". So they fire him. That's the point in which the series (the developers, marketting dept, etc) have failed us, and that's the point in which I have decided that the series does not deserve a *fair chance*. As long as it's coming from those people, I feel like I can't trust them. I don't see why this way of thinking would upset any of you :P

Look at it this way, if K&L2 turned out to be the most epic game ever, I'd still be inclined to not buy/support it, because I don't feel that I should support companies who practice unethical shenanigans.

*edit*

On the flip side, I suppose if the sequel were produced by an entirely different group of people, it would be silly to begrudge them for the former developer's foul play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd call it having standards

If those are the standards of video game journalism, I'm glad I don't read any of that garbage.

The way I see it is that the important people behind the series were trying to trick their consumers into thinking it was a good game when in actuality it wasn't. Thank goodness that people like Gerstmann are willing to stand up and be like "naw, this game sucks, I cannot lie". So they fire him. That's the point in which the series (the developers, marketting dept, etc) have failed us, and that's the point in which I have decided that the series does not deserve a *fair chance*. As long as it's coming from those people, I feel like I can't trust them. I don't see why this way of thinking would upset any of you :P

I just don't get how one guy getting fired for giving a game a fair unbiased review means that any subsequent games in that franchise deserve to be unfairly shit on by other reviewers. It's just as deceptive as being paid big money for positive reviews. Two wrongs don't make a right and all that jazz.

Like I said, if you as a consumer want nothing to do with the franchise, fine whatever. I just don't agree with your point that the game deserves low scores solely because of the Gerstmann deal. It should earn those scores because it's a shit game.

On the flip side, I suppose if the sequel were produced by an entirely different group of people, it would be silly to begrudge them for the former developer's foul play.

But the devs had nothing to do with it. It was Eidos. Even if the game was handed to another studio, Eidos would still be in charge of publishing and marketing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stuff

Ah, I see. Actually, you're right. I was being a little too general (and hasty) in my speaking in lumping devs and publishers together. And I did say "deserves poor reviews" when I suppose what I really meant is "the publishers deserve to be punished for shady practices", in which case to me, the most sensible thing to do is to protest the game by not buying it. Publishers and devs aren't entirely separate, and the fact remains that both games are really neither particularly praiseworthy, so again, I guess any of my protest for this particular series remains moot. ;)

That being said, I concede that the *fair* thing to do would typically be to judge a game based on its own merit. That being said, I still see no real harm in a reviewer throwing in a disclaimer of sorts that says "Hey, even if this game is good, the publisher (or whoever sits on the money pot at the end of the cash register) should be reprimanded for foul practices."

I mean, people get in trouble for stuff like say, insider trading, and what they did wasn't really all that different was it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If those are the standards of video game journalism, I'm glad I don't read any of that garbage.

So you don't actually read anything game related or just anything related to the K&L series..?

Besides,

I'd call it having standards, but then again ever since seeing that review on Godhand then seeing some Wii shovelware rated higher than Godhand by a large margin...

Just got to be selective that's all. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kane and Lynch 1 was an abortion. I bought it used for 5 bucks, and still got ripped off. The combat is horrid, on the verge of unplayable. The camera, especially in co op, feels like it was done by an idiot. The cover system is ass, the AI goes from flat out retard to insanely cheap in the matter of seconds, etc.

K&L2 demo was basically more of the same, add a handicam, a little better graphics, and a lot of darkness. And from what I understand, 4 hours is flat out ridiculious for a single player campaign. What the hell were they thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Metroid Other M

Sounds like a real stinker then.

Not as bad as he makes it out to be. I enjoyed it (and once you get the ability to skip cutscenes, you enjoy it a whole lot more).

However, I am FAR from trying to discourage jokes at the game's expense; the plot SHOULD be ridiculed to the point where it will be a long time before Sakamoto is brave enough to try THIS again.

So I thought it was pretty funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. I can't recall what game it was, but I can remember completely disagreeing with one of his previous reviews having played said game myself. Here... not so much. The story and execution of the story SHOULD be ridiculed to keep it from happening again.

Tho by now, we've had recurring Ridleys, two space labs creating bioweapons and imitating natural habitats and (oh how surprisingly) breeding metroids, recurring Samus-shaped Samus-based enemies, Ridley, escape sequences, multiple warddrobe/armor malfunctions, inexplicable loss of powerups at the start of most of her adventures, Ridley, fire level ice level jungle level... Ridley... Seems like they've been out of ideas for a while already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I certainly think Other M recycled too much from Fusion, I don't think you can say stuff like "fire level ice level" is indicative of total lack of creativity; I mean, Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 had those, and in the latter, I am SURE no one could say they're out of ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a first, guys! I know that Yahtzee purposefully hates the Wii, and I know that he purposefully acts incredibly negative on purpose, to generate buzz...But for the first time, I completely agreed with one of his reviews. It didn't stop me from liking M:OM (because I do), but I didn't hear a single illegitimate complaint. Shocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...