Thing is, reviews need to specify the crowd games are meant to.

My girlfriend bought Endless Ocean for herself and loves every minute of it.

i dislike VG reviews in general. the only way your going to know if you like a game or not is if you play it.

It is the purest form of escapism: a game that absorbs you completely and doesn't allow your brain any time to reflect on what you're doing

...but, isn't that what games are for? Am I wrong for wanting to be "absorbed completely"?

And what is wrong with "what [I'm] doing"??? I mean, when I read I book, I don't suddenly throw it in a fire because I realized that I'm simply holding a collection of paper and staring at said paper for hours on end.

No, I am enveloped in the story, just like a movie or (GASP!) a game!!!

@Ashurahori: They do? Shouldn't the reader take it upon themselves to know if the reviewing publication is right for them?

@mossberg: Me too. Too many decimals, too much focus on light bloom, not enough "this is fun."
now where's my NES...

As a hardcore gamer, it is good for me to have a hardcore perspective on games before I think about buying them.

What is funny is how the moment they get a 10/10 rating they splatter the rating on the game site, I have several games with those stickers ... and lets not over advertisement.

So what the hell do they want? 10/10 rating in shovelware?

If anything, its gaming journalism that is not critical or professional enough ...

@mossberg: But thats the pit hole and wasted money.

Perfect example?, I should have read the review on Assassin Creed before purchasing. My local GS will give me 15 bucks for it :/

Ass creed is up in the garbagedom with Mortal Kombat for GBA and Dora explorer.

I always thought Gametrailers did a great job at reviewing games on their own merits and not on the expectations of certain audiences.

Different games are like different cuisines -- you need to sample it to see if you like it, and even then, it doesn't guarantee you'll like everything in that genre. For example, my girlfriend loves Italian food, yet hates calimari. I love fighting games, but I don't especially like Mortal Kombat.

Good reviewers can come down hard on a game, yet communicate aspects of the game so that readers can determine if they should give it a shot or not based on their own likes and dislikes. I think reviews are valuable, but shouldn't be over-valued.

@Fyren: thats what blockbuster is for.

Isn't the criticism leveled at Endless Ocean because it's not a traditional game, but rather an experience?

I haven't gotten it from Gamefly yet, but gamers traditionally see games in terms of story and/or scores. Whereas games like Harvest Moon/Endless Ocean/Animal Crossing are not about winning or reaching a satisfying conclusion, they're about the exploration and the experience.

Let's face it, it's hard to review games in terms of score. When an Endless Ocean type of game gets a high-score review, it gets compared to other high-score reviewed games...and if it gets a low score, then gamers won't go out and try it. That's unfair, because they're two very different gaming experiences.

Never heard of this game (though it looks awesome), but I'm all for "games" that help with relaxation and/or meditation. I'm still saving up for "Wild Divine."

I ran into this issue not too long ago on a forum I frequent. One of the other posters writes game reviews for a website that targets the hardcore (in this case, meaning the "non-casual") demographic. He was assigned to review Endless Ocean and he took the hardcore gamer's approach in writing the review. The end result was that he absolutely reamed it.

The review can be found here:

[www.nzgamer.com]

Not long after the review went up, the website's head editor apparently got an e-mail from Nintendo regarding the review. It wasn't anything Gerstmann-like. It just said that if the website had no intention of reviewing casual games like Endless Ocean for their intended audience, then they wouldn't send the site review copies of their casual games anymore.

There are two ways that this can be interpreted. One is that Nintendo acted like dicks for threatening to essentially take their ball and go home. The other is that, in reading the review, it seems like the reviewer never gave Endless Ocean an honest chance because he took the wrong approach in reviewing it. I'm not judging him for that. It's his and the website's prerogative in determining what criteria they use to review games. And really, if the website isn't going to write reviews for casual games with a casual audience in mind, what point does Nintendo (or any company, for that matter) have in sending the site review copies? After reading it myself, the only thing I felt was that if I wanted a review that told me what I wanted to know about the game, I would have to look elsewhere.

And honestly, I don't believe that there is a magic formula by which all games can be judged equally. Just like I wouldn't use the same criteria to judge Endless Ocean and God of War, for example, I wouldn't take the approach I use in judging Metal Slug Anthology to review Final Fantasy XII.

Thing is, the chimps who adore this shit don't read reviews at all.

They are right. Video gaming news and reviews are one of the least professional forms of journalism.

The problem is gamers in general, for some reason, are very narrow minded. Like psychotic racist kind of narrow minded. I dunno if this stems from the fact gaming is treated like a kid's activity so those involved act like kids or if gaming does ruin social skills and as such gamers lack the ability to behave maturely.

Or maybe it's the fact that anyone can be a games reviewer/ newsie. While I don't believe you need a qualification to to do writing, I do think there will be a problem if the majority of an industry's media are generally very young people with no experience.

As long as gamers aren't accepting of new ideas and casual games then games will never be like books or movies but maybe that's what gamers want.

I think that with the Wii and the DS and this Nintendo idea of changing the way games are played is bringing bringing a lot of games that doesn't fit on the "traditional" genres.. and the press still doesn't know how to deal with then.. you can't review a game like Brain Age or Endless Ocean the same you review Halo..

I visit Rotten Tomatoes for a digest of movie reviews, frequently, and I think the movie review process is every bit as broken as the game review process.

I've seen as many toweringly dip-shitted film reviews as I have game reviews. What has always irked me specifically about game reviews, is having the jaded palate of people who are obliged to play a great many similar titles adversely effect their assessment of what may be a very enjoyable game to those whose experiences aren't saturated in the same way.

Tackling Eurogamer on scores is rather futile though, they seem to pride themselves on their "No Hive-Mind" approach, letting each reviewers score stand as the official word of the site. This leads to astonishing inconsistencies in criteria for marking down/up, most notably when a different reviewer gives a widely different score to a PAL version of title that scored much higher as an import title.

The number at the end of the view isn't worth a damn compared to reading the text. As long as games have an arbitrary score system attached, most people are going to be unhappy with games reviews.

This game does look interesting.

While I won't disagree with the fact that reviewers should keep themselves focused on the key points of the game, mechanics, story, the gameplay as a whole, I do think that some reviewers really need to sit down and weigh their reviews a bit better sometimes. On occasion, the reviews I've read at various places read to me more like an explanation of fact rather than an opinion on the game. I can understand if a game's controls feel clunky, or if there's pop-ups or bugs in the game that need to be pointed out, that's something that's hard to deny. Outside of real, physical things you can point out and go 'This is bad/good', everything else is merely you (the reviewer's) opinion. If the story doesn't quite pull you along, or the gameplay could stand to be a little deeper... that's all entirely your opinion.

If you can't see why something could be fun to someone else, you're probably not a very good reviewer, and you're doing little more than a personal opinion piece. Really, unless you have a name and a following as a good reviewer, does that opinion matter much? It's like me sitting down and reviewing things. Who the hell am I? Outside of people that might read a few grips and smart ass remarks I post around here, does that somehow make me a source to go to for game opinions? Maybe not, but on the other hand, I don't really shun games for being different, or casual, or free-form. Not everything has to be pushed out before me, cramming me through the hoops that've been programmed into the game for me to enjoy it. And games that want to try something outside of the normal are just fine with me and they should be just fine with everybody else. Unless of course you really want the industry boiled down to a handful of game types.

@Moonshadow101: Glad to see you didn't even bother.

I think the issue here is more of a case of someone judging a genre outside of its intentions. Good critics in any medium may have preferences for one or another genres, but usually take the time to try and understand a work within the context of its intended audience, its genre conventions and some ultimately subjective final take. So a film critic might not love Westerns for example but s/he can spot a good Western if it comes along. If you go look at pretty much any respected critic in the press, you'll see this to the point that yes, even big tent summer blockbusters will occasionally get positive reviews.

But reading reviews like the Eurogamer one you see people not really bothering with thinking about what the game is, what and who it is for, and if it might be enjoyable but rather grading it on a scale designed for typical high adrenalin goal oriented fare. It's like taking points off some romantic comedy because it didn't have spaceships, or the effects were few and far between. It just kind of doesn't make sense and it reeks of 'enthusiast' writing over a more critical stance.

What really bugs me about Endless Ocean is that it's a shite game in a shite series and the only reason anyone cares now is because Nintendo's publishing it and its on the Wii. I got most of my non-gaming flat to play it, and they all thought it was a boring bunch of wank too.

Nintendo and its supporters can't expect hardcore sites to drop their standards just because they are trying to court a new demographic. If they don't want Endless Ocean and its kin to be reviewed to those standards, then don't send them a review copy. It's as simple as that.

Game reviews are pretty obviously biased toward Action games, First Person Shooters, and the loved franchises.

If you are a popular FPS franchise....well let's just say I don't think you could score lower than an 85/100 on Metacritic if you crapped in a box and labelled it Half Life 3, Halo 4 or Call of Duty 5?

@Donutta: I have to disagree - Endless Ocean is an excellent game - great graphics (for the Wii) an interesting (though clumsily told) storyline, lots of different objectives, plenty of opportunities to just enjoy the underwater scenery, optional side stories and some really nice music.

I can honestly say that I've spent more time playing Endless Ocean than any other Wii game including Mario Galaxy and Twilight Princess. Of course, it helps that I dive as a hobby and I find it genuinely interesting discovering new varieties of fish in the game and exploring so of the more exotic dive sites such as the abyss and the lost city.

It's unfair to write a game off just 'cause it's 'casual' - It's a cop-out I know but if you like this sort of thing, Endless Ocean is a wonderful game - if you want to fight monsters under the sea, you're probably better off with BioShock (which I also loved).

It seems hardcore gamers are never happy in the first place. Games, even when good, are scourged in the hardcore game reviews as for being too short or expensive or easy. I stopped reading game reviews after I had seen enough complaining that the game doesn't match the aspect ratio of their television, or the version on their preferred system was unacceptable because that other system had higher brightness levels.

@Uglyshoe:

It's not hardcore gamers that are never happy; it's reviewers. They want every game to be a 10/10. They can't accept that a game is going to have flaws.

I don't really understand what they're trying to convey here. First, they say that all games are mindless drivel that require no critical thinking and offer nothing to the player outside of killing time. Then they go on to say that casual games are different because they're just for killing time.

@Donutta: Exactly why you would NOT purchase the game in the first place. It's not for you, not meant for you, and would never 'satisfy' whatever it is you're after. The 'opinion is fact' attitude, exactly what this article is tapping at.

There is no 'standards' to drop. Outside of how well the game is constructed, each game has it's own standards. Each genre has it's own standards. That's why you have reviewers in the first place, to take something in and interpret it for others. To think that there is some giant 'Blueprint for Awesome Game' laying around that everything should be compared to is foolish, and when reviewers take to doing that, it's stifling games as a whole, pigeonholing themselves into this squawk-box that only preaches to a particular brand of gamer. If that's what a reviewer wants to do to themselves, their choice, but what's to stop me from writing off the review and indeed, the entire site, from being a load of 'shite'.

@iamnotdryad: I was really thinking hardcore gamers in general not necessarily reviewers. Hardcore gamers will lambaste good titles in the comments for silly nitpicking details.

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: Ignore the grammatical typos, my brain is a splittin'. Need a good drink, or some Excedrin.

The non hardcore do not read reviews, who cares.

i would like a review site with reviewers that are exactly like me in lifestyle and game tastes. that'd be awesome.

in all seriousness though, i do think there is enough of an audience for sites that are more casual/mid-core than most game review sites. gametrailers seems to do a nice job here.

@Kyle81: gross over-generalization. you're forgetting the mid/ex-core audience.

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: I didn't purchase it. I'm said reviewer of the NZGamer link someone else posted too. A lot of people seem to be of the mind that I went into the game hating it, but in all honesty I also got the rest of my flat to play it too as I was afraid I was being too harsh on it. I gathered their thoughts and mine and wrote a review. Considering it also sells for US$60, I didn't think it was worth recommending to our target audience.

I love endless ocean absolutely worth the purchase.

@Donutta: See, here it's at most, US30. It's a budget title here by comparison. So, I can see how the price tag could at least a deterrent to giving it a try there. Again, I can't understand how anyone can think the game is terrible by any means. Now, it might just be too boring, or too uninteresting to hold onto your attention, and that's one thing... but we're not talking about a Cruis'n, where a game entirely doesn't try. Or crash and burns. We're talking about a game with a purpose of having little purpose other than a little relaxation, a little information, and general poking around.

Original article was spot-on.

Great! The videogame industry and its audience is finally growing large and broad enough to support different types of "games", Endless ocean being one of them.

I generally steer away from game industry/movie industry analogies, but this seems like an obvious one- not all games are for all gamers, like not all movies are for all moviegoers. And that is fine!

Someone who loved the transformers movie might hate casablanca, and vice versa. Does that mean either sucked? No.

"What if you just want to relax in front of the television set, doing not much of anything, spending some time with your family, experiencing a story or looking at pretty moving pictures?"

Here's a novel thought. Turn off the console and watch some TV. That's what all those networks spend countless millions of dollars for; so you don't have to spend 60 dollars to enjoy some time in front of the tube.

And to all you naysayers out there that say there is no good programming on TV these days, I'm pretty confident there is SOMETHING on cable that you'd enjoy, what with it's eleventybillion channels.

@djcoffee: What about the core-core, apple core, Molten Core, nougat core or chewy whipped chocolate core demographics?

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: Exactly. And for what it is, I think it's fantastic. Aquanaut's Holiday-esque good times. I can also see why it won't appeal to a lot of people, but I've disliked the tone a lot of reviews have taken. "Well, you can't fight anything and you can't die, so it sucks" more or less.

The "Hardcore V. Casual Last Nerd Standing Texas-Twister Deathmatch" is the most spurious and idiotid "debate" going in elctronic enentertainment today. It really gained traction when the Wii emphasised gameplay and broad appeal while it's stable-mates were slathering on the power and the graphical glory. When it became clear that Nintendo was achieving great success without hi-def carnage- and getting the GD grown-ups interested as well- the howling began...

What exactly is it that alleged "hardcore" gamers fear from the broadening of the overall audience for video games? What even defines "hardcore", and what are the specific benefits of being in that club? Could it simply be that they fear getting pushed off the couch so that sis can get her Cooking Mama on?

And who speaks for the "Casual" gamers? NOBODY! Because they don't even know there's a beef.

I would argue that the difference between critics bashing shitty movies and shitty games is that when you go to buy your ticket for "shitty summer blockbuster" the guy selling it to you will not say how bad it is. Usually, anyway. Blockbuster will not say "OH GOD THAT'S SO BAD" when you try to rent it.

If you go into a gamestop, however, and try to buy "shitty casual game" the employee working is probably going to at LEAST make a crack about how bad it is, if not try and persuade you to buy something else.

@chiefpoopingpants: Absolutely right. The majority of the people that make up the gaming press are simply not good at what they do. They aren't very good writers and cannot convey their ideas in articulate and enlightening ways. They don't have the same education a real writer would have, and it's generally because real writers tend to go to better and more prestigious fields, so you're left with a small talent pool.

The thing is, people that like Transformers the movie, or games like Endless Ocean have come to understand they cannot rely on reviews for this.

The thing is, if you want an action-packed movie, or an casual game with little in the way of actual gameplay, you don't NEED reviews.

You'll already know if an action movie has enough action from trailers, or if a casual game seem easy or is pretty from gametrailers or screenshots.

Reviews are necessary for movies and games that go beyond the mainstream, because the qualities that set them apart (characterisation, story, gameplay, controls, replayability) can not be as obvious to someone who hasn't played them yet.

I did not need to read a review of Rambo 4 to know it would be violent and action-packed, But without reading reviews, I wouldn't have known Assassin's Creed would be repetitive, or that Bioshock, Portal, Mass Effect were teh awesome.

What would a review of Rambo 4 intended for its target audience, would sound like? First, it would have to forgo (or keep to the minimum) talk of its story and characters (except John himself). What would there be to say?

If you take out what makes hardcore games good or bad out of reviews, there isn't enough left to actually make a review.