Everytime I go to the local library, which is not very often at all, I pick up all the latest copies of an Aussie gaming magazine. It covers all the games not just on the pc but also on the consoles which I hate. I only really read it for the reviews and news of upcoming games, and recently I read a preview of Warhammer Online, the game that I am dying to play. Sadly the preview basically sucked showing that the author really knew nothing about the game and probably had only checked out the main site for two minutes to fill up his head with knowledge. This little article sparked my furious rage that I guess had been burning within me for many a long time.
First of all I hate their rating system; its out of 100 with various categories of gameplay, visuals, and sound. While this sounds really quite cool in theory they must have two headed reviewers that make the most illogical conclusions. For example for one game it will get 67 for gameplay, 74 for graphics, and 68 for sound, the logical conclusion is that it should ad up to something around 65-75 right? Nope, less then 60 would be more like it. There are other examples like both graphics and sound being below 50 with the gameplay at 70 at the total for the game 75 but I don't really want to focus on that. Instead I'll go back to a long lasting debate that pervaded the magazine a few months ago when people wanted them to change back to the old marking system of 10. The main point was that they felt that the magazine was stuffing the scoring up, as I do. By the magazine's standards anything below 75 was rubbish. 75-85 was decently good and 85-100 was excellent. This kind of marking system kinda messes with you minds when you compare 7/10 to other magazines and it is considered a pretty good mark. ARRGGGHH
So they stuffed up the marking, so what? Its not that a huge massively big thing of a deal right? I guess not, and I think I could excuse it if the writers weren't such a bunch of hypocrites. I don't meant this in a literal kind of sense but rather referring to their overall demeanor. The articles are often written slightly tongue-in-cheek and quite bias, (As it should be) but when it comes to a criticism of their opinion by a reader, the natural order of the universe is shaken. Suddenly massive big fake pieces of 'I respect your opinion...but you know nothing and I have a better job then you, and I am smarter, and I cannot be wrong!' are thrown about.
Anywho, the magazine pisses me off as most of the writers are self-conceited jerks who think they're funny (And sometimes are, but thats not the point) with a rubbish rating system. But, I guess I'll keep on reading it, until I find a better source of gaming reviews and information, never use the internet as it hurts my eyes...
First of all I hate their rating system; its out of 100 with various categories of gameplay, visuals, and sound. While this sounds really quite cool in theory they must have two headed reviewers that make the most illogical conclusions. For example for one game it will get 67 for gameplay, 74 for graphics, and 68 for sound, the logical conclusion is that it should ad up to something around 65-75 right? Nope, less then 60 would be more like it. There are other examples like both graphics and sound being below 50 with the gameplay at 70 at the total for the game 75 but I don't really want to focus on that. Instead I'll go back to a long lasting debate that pervaded the magazine a few months ago when people wanted them to change back to the old marking system of 10. The main point was that they felt that the magazine was stuffing the scoring up, as I do. By the magazine's standards anything below 75 was rubbish. 75-85 was decently good and 85-100 was excellent. This kind of marking system kinda messes with you minds when you compare 7/10 to other magazines and it is considered a pretty good mark. ARRGGGHH
So they stuffed up the marking, so what? Its not that a huge massively big thing of a deal right? I guess not, and I think I could excuse it if the writers weren't such a bunch of hypocrites. I don't meant this in a literal kind of sense but rather referring to their overall demeanor. The articles are often written slightly tongue-in-cheek and quite bias, (As it should be) but when it comes to a criticism of their opinion by a reader, the natural order of the universe is shaken. Suddenly massive big fake pieces of 'I respect your opinion...but you know nothing and I have a better job then you, and I am smarter, and I cannot be wrong!' are thrown about.
Anywho, the magazine pisses me off as most of the writers are self-conceited jerks who think they're funny (And sometimes are, but thats not the point) with a rubbish rating system. But, I guess I'll keep on reading it, until I find a better source of gaming reviews and information, never use the internet as it hurts my eyes...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment