JFo Posted October 12, 2004 Report Share Posted October 12, 2004 I noticed this over at the Penny Arcade forums and I thought I'd share it here, since I don't want to steer the Paper Mario 2 thread in the GameCube section off-course. Anyway, for those of you who haven't been paying attention, this nifty sequel to the popular Nintendo 64 RPG shipped on Monday, and has been garnering some pretty favorable reviews. For instance, GameSpot awarded it with an overall score of 9.2 and IGN gave it a 9.1. Oddly enough, this month's issue of Game Informer rated it a lowly 6.5 out of 10, which seems strange, considering the high praise it's received from other sites. My beef here isn't necessarily with the score itself. If the people at Game Informer magazine didn't like it very much, they're entitled to their opinions. What amazes me, is the explanation for the low score as outlined in this quote here: "GI-Jeremy wrote: Lisa and I both knew that our Paper Mario scores were going to cause controversy. Yes, we know that many people out there will love it. We also know that it is a well-made game. However, it also WILL NOT appeal to many people - I would safely say that more people will dislike it than like it. Why? Like we said in the review, it's a very kiddie game - it's target audience is clearly young gamers - I would say 10 and under. For that reason, we had to score it low. Remember, we aren't scoring games strictly on our personal opinions, we're also scoring them based on how much we think THE GAMING PUBLIC will like them. We've all played games that we personally disliked and scored them well because we've known that most people will like them, and we've also scored games low that we love, because most people won't enjoy them. For example, I really like the bizarre frog golf game Ribbit King, and I gave it a 7, because it's just not for everyone. Paper Mario 2 also scored low because it's just not for everyone. If you think it's a 10 in your book, it's a ten in your book, and that doesn't change if we disagree. We're here to guide you on what games to pick up, but ultimately your personal opinion is what will make you buy a game or not. I hope this helps." Um, no, that doesn't help. Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but isn't the whole purpose of writing a review to detail exactly what the reviewer thought of a game, so as to recommend or not recommend it? When you begin basing your opinion on what you think others will like, then the whole point of writing the review becomes moot. There's no way you can know what everyone is going to like (and not everyone is going to like the same thing), and even you could, who cares? These are opinion pieces, not polls. When you try to pretend as if you like a game because you suspect others will (or vice-versa), you're being disingenuous. That's a nice way of saying you're lying. And if I think you're lying, I'm not going to bother to read your reviews, because they can't be trusted. You know what I think happened here? I think these guys played Paper Mario 2, decided they didn't like it, and rather than face up to the heat they would surely receive by scoring it low, they decided to blame their readers for it. After all, if they were the ones open to the game's design and concept, it would have gotten a higher score. Since they apparently don't like those kinds of "kiddie" games, the reviewers themselves can?t be blamed for the low score. After all, their reviews are only intended to reflect what they suspect will be the general consensus. Unbe-fucking-lievable! Unfortunately, I don't have the issue in question yet, so I can't comment specifically on what's written in it. Hopefully, this issue will arrive sometime in the next few days so I can take a look at it. I figured you all would get a kick out of that though. Commence ass-wipe reviewer bashing immediately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.