• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Gamespot Gives Skyward Sword a 7.5???!!!

Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Proof That Gamespot's Review is Fallacious

This is straight out of the text review:

"Most troubling of all is how the infrared aiming works. There are certain items that require you to aim at the screen. However, the calibration is frequently wrong, forcing you to tap down on the D-pad to recenter."

If you've been following Skyward Sword news you probably know that Skyward Sword uses no infrared aiming whatsoever- even the menus are navigated with motion-plus. I can't take seriously a review written by someone who doesn't even know how the game works.

Kudos to gamespot for giving the new map pack to modern warfare 2 (widely misnomered as modern warfare 3) a whole 10% higher score than the masterpiece that is skyward sword.
 

Aero_Dynamic

エアロダイナミック
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Location
...?
I guess you could say Skyward Sword isn't for everyone. But I find this review hard to believe, seeing as how SS has recieved numerous 9.5/10 to 10/10 scores.
 

Vibed

must read before he posts
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Location
I'm on your wish list
There are quite a few mad people in here, it's kind of funny actually.

Even mods suspect trolling? Seriously? It 's like you guys think this review has some ulterior motive or something. I can't believe someone posting a good (not necessarily great) score on a AAA production game is immediately thought trolling or bias. The review is bad, yes, the M+ complaints all don't make sense considering they factually work just fine, but this is one person's experience with a game.

A game rated a bit below popular opinion shouldn't be outrageous. The internet isn't and shouldn't be a hive mind. Besides, how can anyone call a 7.5 negative? That's what should be outrageous.

I just find it annoying many think these kind of controversial reviews are attention whores. Just as annoying as when people say they're being honest and weren't paid off.

In fact, we should welcome these contrary opinions, it shows how this game's mechanics are quite unique and polarizing.
 
Last edited:

EternalNocturne

Fluffy hair!
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Location
Skyloft
A game rated a bit below popular opinion shouldn't be outrageous. The internet isn't and shouldn't be a hive mind. Besides, how can anyone call a 7.5 negative? That's what should be outrageous.

For me, personally, it's not the 7.5 that's outrageous -- what's outrageous is the reasons he gave for it.

Infrared sensing? As mentioned above, the Bow controls were clearly shown to not use infrared sensing at all. Also, his review contradicts a lot of what other reviewers have said. He comments that the controls were bad, but in every other review I've read, the controls were very clearly praised.

This control problem even goes back to E3 2011. I heard many people praising Skyward Sword's motion controls after they played the demo, but even so, there were still a handful of people who said that the controls were just horrible. And the only reason for this is probably because they didn't calibrate their controller correctly. It sort of sounds like what's going on now -- the reviewers so far who have scored Skyward Sword 8.0 and below have all said something about wacky controls.

Another thing -- he said something about how Skyward Sword fails to deviate from the traditional, "boring" Zelda formula. I really can't see how he was even able to make this claim when it should have been clear that this was the game that Nintendo wanted to make different.

I do think that people shouldn't get angry or start hating GameSpot over this -- after all, everyone is entitled to their own opinion -- but I just don't find it fair that his opinion is backed by such unrealistic claims.
 

Vibed

must read before he posts
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Location
I'm on your wish list
For me, personally, it's not the 7.5 that's outrageous -- what's outrageous is the reasons he gave for it.
Yeah, the whole control part really was weird. I'd say he didn't always calibrate correctly or made too small flicks to swing the sword. As for the infrared sensing part, I don't think it really matters whether he knew that the pointer was using the gyro.

How much it deviates from the Zelda formula really boils down to opinion. Even though pretty much everyone agrees there's a lot of changes, for better or worse, this guy doesn't seem to think they're all that substantial.

It is a poor review, I just hope nobody gets infuriated over a silly metascore.
 

Unlucky Monkey

The Great King of Apes
Joined
May 17, 2011
Location
NRW, Germany
I find this a bit strange. The Outrage is definitely not unfounded. Twilight Princess received also a strange score. And now, the successor of Twilight Princess, praised by most of the critics as the best Zelda ever, received an even lower score.

Let me make an example. For me, Uncharted is one of the most hyped games ever created. Played through the third part of this installment. Well, it features one of the most awesome visuals I see in Video Gaming to date. But the gameplay is still boring. The giant plot twist at the end of Drakes Deception (promised by the developers) was nothing more than a cheap repitition of the one from the second game. Compared to a game like Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted 3 has no rights to exist. But that's my opinion. The game receives 9 and 10 scores from almost every gaming magazine. Gamespot gives a 9 out of 10. Well, compared to the second game, Uncharted 3 Drakes Deception is nothing more than a 7 (GameTrailers rated the story of this game with 9 out of 10. How is this possible?).

In this case, I'm not complaining about the 7,5 of Gamespot. But I'm complaining about the complains of the Gamespot Reviewer. They doesen't make any sense to me.
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
I'm going to go out on a limb and say: maybe the game isn't that good? what if he was right? what if the perfect scores where sold? i mean, most of us didn't evan play the game, and the opinion of the once that did is blinded by fanboyisem? maybe Zelda is not as good as it used to be? some reviews said that it feels like Zelda is getting old and I'm really concerned abut it, it is the lowest rated 3d Zelda....
before you verbally kill me, i would like to refer to this thread that i wrote, it would explain what i said right now in more detail:
http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showthread.php?25849-Is-Zelda-Getting-Old&p=386600#post386600
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Location
Halifax
I've got a few thoughts about this, and here they are in no particular order:

We're all going to buy the game, and most probably really enjoy it; so for our purposes, review scores don't matter beyond outside confirmation of how awesome we want the game to be. That said, there are circumstances that actually make review scores semi-important, and unsurprisingly they all involve money. In one manner, it's kind of like the movies; typically a person will take a chance on a film they don't know much about if the critics rave about it (film studios are aware of this, and have even concocted entirely fictional critics to give positive reviews to their films). In another way, scores can matter to investors too, as they want the company into which they've invested their money to make a product undeniably awesome and desirable (admittedly, they don't really care if the game is legitimately awesome; but it's far easier to sell a game with universal praise than without it). There's a couple other ways in which money can lend weight to review scores; but ultimately my point is that: when critics unfairly pound on games for shock attention, they aren't really enacting the 'merely their opinion and thereby victimless crimes' that some would claim. I've worked for a game studio or two, and trust me, when jobs are being cut because their last game didn't sell as well as was needed to keep everyone working, the shock-jockey lambasting of critical 'opinions' can certainly seem like its had some victims. That said, when a game is mostly heralded as being utterly amazing, the suspiciously lower scores don't matter nearly as much. If anything, they're just easier to ignore, which helps to not impair profits; ergo SS should be fine.

From a more personal and thereby grandly irrelevant perspective, I remember checking Gamespot regularly waaaay back when the N64 and PS1 were the pinnacle of console hardware, and even then I found their reviews in general a little too nit-picky. I developed a standing rule that whatever score they gave a game, I'd add a full half point in my head. I did this due to practical experience from playing their reviewed games myself, and finding almost without fail that it deserved (to me) a score closer to my off the bat 'adjusted' grade, rather than their original one. I used that standing rule as a helpful guide when deciding what new game to try out. However, as time passed that point-gap between Gamespot and my own opinion widened to the extent that their reviews ceased to be useful for me to ascertain whether a game was worth checking out (that's when I started to check IGN more regularly, but inversely, I find they sometimes grade a little too softly). When the reviews for SS started to flood in, I entirely expected to see around an 8/10 from Gamespot because of my past experiences with their reviews. A 7.5 from them isn't terribly shocking; but it does cement in my mind that Gamespot has decided to embrace the "we're hard-assed hard-core gamers" reputation they've sporadically attempted to cultivate around themselves, which I've always found kind of absurd. Their direct site didn't even get a hit from me this time anyway, Youtube did.

In terms of the video review itself (I didn't bother checking the written version), I couldn't decide if there was simply some poor reviewing practices going on, a-la the bizarre comments about IR control, or that the writer was simply trying to distinguish their site by standing diametrically opposed to their contemporaries. There were definitely a few odd things that stood out, the most immediate being that the first twenty seconds of the review were utterly negative. There wasn't even any exposition; instead it was just an immediate flow of criticisms, warranted or otherwise. I'm not a game reviewer; but I've spent an awful lot of time studying writing (I have an odd academic history given my current profession), and as far as I can see,the primary reason you'd want to format a piece of journalism that way, would be to make it clear you're creating an argument against something. That's a fairly odd course of action for a supposedly 'unbiased' critic to take; but then again, it could just be weak writing.

Ultimately though, Gamespot could score the game a 0 out of 10 for all it really matters to me. I only really care what I think about the game when I actually play it (I'm not expecting to give it a perfect 10 on my own scale either to be fair), and that the excellent work by those that make the games is recognized for what it is, as that's how more awesome games are made in the future.
 

Sarianae

Infinite Dreamer
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Location
Storybrooke, Maine
Just wanted to mention, the review has been updated.

Editor's note on GameSpot said:
This review originally stated that aiming was handled through the Wii Remote's infrared sensor, which is incorrect. The review has been amended accordingly. GameSpot regrets the error.

And about that, GoNintendo's comment on it is something really worth considering:

RMC said:
Some people are debating just what this means for the review in general. The GameSpot reviewer didn't find the controls to be responsive, and now we've come to learn that he believed aiming was handled through IR. Does this warrant another look at controls, or do the same complaints stand?

Personally, I would think that the controls aspect should be looked at again. If the reviewer was trying to aim by pointing the Wiimote via IR sensor, I could see how that would lead to some major control issues. He would be holding the Wiimote in pointer position when not needed or intended, or even used.

[Source via GoNintendo]

Honestly, it looks like the reviewer never actually understood the controls (and perhaps never cared enough trying to), played the game with an inaccurate understand of it and then scored the game based on this flawed understanding, faulting the game for something that was essentially his own error.

The proper thing to do would be to not only apologize (they are already losing credibility in terms of their professionalism with this though) but also reevaluate the game properly. Either replay it the way it was meant to be played for a re-review, or correct the verdict concerning the controls on the review that's been released. Sadly, I don't think they care enough to do either.

The game is almost out anyway. Let's play it for ourselves to find the conclusion most valid to us anyway.
 
Last edited:

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
This is a 7.5 out of 7.5, right? :xd: :rolleyes:

Haha, anyway, I agree completely with what Djinn said.

So it looks like their little plan worked out well enough. Their rating got all of you guys interested in them specifically and I'm sure everyone here visited the site a few times in the last 24 hours. ...Stir up the emotions of the fans and then wait for something to happen.

This is exactly what they are doing, although he's also right that they just flat-out hate the Wii and Nintendo in general. The reviewer said SS has made the same mistakes the series has made for the past few years, yet he never truly clarified what he meant. The review is obviously biased. They also don't care what we think. They're just going to abuse the Wii and any game that's on it just because they feel like it. That's GameSpot. Get used to it.
 

LolGames4U

Viceroy of Area 11
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Location
USA
GameSpot, you suck. I'll form my own opinion when I play it (SUNDAY!!!) but I can't agree with their statements. It looks like an innovative game and it pisses me off when people give a game slack for being something different. Ugh, I'll stick with IGN, thanks.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom