A Review of A Review
Edit (February 3, 2013): For another bad example of a horrible review, check out this video on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z2Z23SAFVA. It's a flash video based off of a dramatic reading of an actual review done by someone on another gaming website. In my opinion it get's funnier every time I watch it, but that's just me.
I recently had the opportunity to read a review of Borderlands 2. Keep in mind that I have not yet had the opportunity to play Borderlands 2 (although I shall play it as soon as I can get my paws on it) (It's in the mail at the moment). However, all of the reviews done by professional critics that I have read about Borderlands 2 have lauded the games ability to improve upon its predecessor in every single way. GameInformer Magazine gave the game a 9.75, which is one of the highest scores that I have ever seen. IGN gave it a 9.0, Metacritic a 9.0, PC gamer a 90/100, and G4TV gave it a 5/5. So simply from these facts, one can see that Borderlands 2 is definitely in the running for the Game of the Year title.
However, after perusing GameInformer.com for a bit, I came upon a reviewer who gave Borderlands 2 an 8/10. Here is his review (you can find it here):
http://www.gameinformer.com/games/borderlands_2/b/user_reviews/archive/2012/09/18/a-moderately-enjoyable-repackaging-of-the-original.aspx
A Moderately Enjoyable Repackaging of the Original
By Student-Athelete
Borderlands 2 certainly retains the innovative elements that made the original a hit (namely its genre-blending, its original weapon concepts, its satirical comedy and its high-contrast cartoon graphics), but fails to evolve in any meaningful fashion, or at least fix the flawed mechanics of the franchise.
Cluttered and excessively detailed HUD and menu elements make the game overwhelming and claustrophobic. This effectively ruins split screen multiplayer- one of the most fun ways to play the game- and makes solo play less comfortable. The unique art style makes distinguishing objects from one another an unnecessary strain on the eyes. This is a particular issue in combat situations. Rendering issues often make textures look blurry. Environments vary more than the first game, but structures, clutter and boxes still appear generic and over-used. Basic additions like increased character customization, expanded skill trees, and 'Bada**' ranks make the game more interesting, but feel more like minor changes than defining of characteristics of a full-blown sequel. That said, the exciting gameplay from the original remains intact, paired with new characters, enemies, and adventures.
Overall, the game feels to be a repackaging of the first installment, but persists as a moderately enjoyable experience.
And now it's time to dissect this horrible review:
1. If one looks at the time that the review was posted, September 18, 2012 at 04:29 PM, we can discern a few things. It took at least 15-20 minutes to write this review so that puts his starting time somewhere around 4:00-4:15PM. If we assume that he went to the midnight release of the game and the store in which he bought was approximately 5-15 minutes away from his house that puts the time in which he started playing the game around 12:15. If he played nonstop through the game from 12:15-4:15, that gives us at least 16 hours of the game. However, most sane people sleep for approximately 8 hours a day, which brings the number down further to 8 hours of gameplay. Including estamated time for bathroom breaks and food breaks, we are looking at about 7 hours of gameplay for this review. Hardly enough to call this a "legitimate review." Professional reviewers spend on average 40+ hours with a game (or complete the game) before even beginning their review of the game they have been playing. So compare a measely 7 hours (on a good estimate) with the 40+ hours of a good review. Already we have established that this guy has not played enough of the game to review it well.
Even looking at these simple screenshots of the game, one can see that there is a greater variety of colours in the game. And unlike "Sudent-Athlete" stated, the enemies are clearly seen in each of the screenshots. And as for the "unique art style," that's what makes Borderlands stand out from the rest of the FPS (first person shooter) genre. It has a very stylized look at the world and makes it quite beautiful. So we have this argument down the drain.
3. Student-Athlete claims that the set pieces are tightly cluttered with each other. I hate to belabor this point, but that is part of the charm of Borderlands. Pandora (the location in which Borderlands 2 is set) is supposed to be a wasteland, settled by bandits and wild, feral creatures. That is what makes Pandora such an intriguing place to visit. The areas that haven't been taken over by Hyperion (the big, bad company in the game) are supposed to look hand-built with whatever scrap material people could get their hands on. And it adds a certain flair to the landscape. Yes, some of the set pieces may be used again, but one has to understand, in a world where everyone makes their own shelter, of course there will be some repetition.
4. The expanded character trees are completely different than their original counterparts. Zer0, the assasin has an emphasis on sniping and melee kills. His "Deception" skill plants a holograph of himself to distract enemies as he closes in for a kill or sneaks away to locate a better sniping position. Mordecai, the sniper from the previous game had a different emphasis. While he had an emphasis on sniper rifles, Mordecai also had an emphasis on pistols, be they repeaters or revolvers. His "bloodwing" skill allowed him to throw out a bird of prey that would home in on enemies and cause them massive elemental and physical damage. Both character has a completely different emphasis and playstyle.
Dig deeper into the characters of the new game and you'll find that Axton, the commando, has an emphasis on support, with his "Scorpio Turret 2.0" skill. Maya, the siren, deals massive elemental damage with her "Phaselock" ability and is built to handle large groups of enemies at a time while also providing the ablities of a medic for the vault hunters. Salvador, the gunzerker, has an emphasis on weaponry with his "Gunzerking" skill, and is tailored towards players who swap weapons quite often and love to be in the middle of the fray. Each character has a completely different feel than their predecessor. Dig into the character profiles of the original Borderlands cast and you'll find that Brick, the bezerker was focused on melee and rocket launchers with his abilities. Lilith, the siren, was focused on elemental damage and stealth with her abilites, but unlike her successor, did not have an emphasis on healing. It was Roland, the soldier, who had an entire branch of his ability tree focused on healing, as well as an emphasis on shotguns and assult rifles with his ablilities.
With these arguments I have refuted everything that "Student-Athlete" has put forward, proving that his review of an 8.00 was not well given. I admit that in the past I have given some pretty biased reviews myself, but nothing of this horrible caliber.
I will end my review of this review with this simple statement:
If you're going to do a review of a game, make sure that it's unbiased and you have played enough of the game to know what the heck you're talking about. If you haven't done this, pleas shut your trap (I'm looking at you MW3 naysayers).
I recently had the opportunity to read a review of Borderlands 2. Keep in mind that I have not yet had the opportunity to play Borderlands 2 (although I shall play it as soon as I can get my paws on it) (It's in the mail at the moment). However, all of the reviews done by professional critics that I have read about Borderlands 2 have lauded the games ability to improve upon its predecessor in every single way. GameInformer Magazine gave the game a 9.75, which is one of the highest scores that I have ever seen. IGN gave it a 9.0, Metacritic a 9.0, PC gamer a 90/100, and G4TV gave it a 5/5. So simply from these facts, one can see that Borderlands 2 is definitely in the running for the Game of the Year title.
However, after perusing GameInformer.com for a bit, I came upon a reviewer who gave Borderlands 2 an 8/10. Here is his review (you can find it here):
http://www.gameinformer.com/games/borderlands_2/b/user_reviews/archive/2012/09/18/a-moderately-enjoyable-repackaging-of-the-original.aspx
A Moderately Enjoyable Repackaging of the Original
By Student-Athelete
Borderlands 2 certainly retains the innovative elements that made the original a hit (namely its genre-blending, its original weapon concepts, its satirical comedy and its high-contrast cartoon graphics), but fails to evolve in any meaningful fashion, or at least fix the flawed mechanics of the franchise.
Cluttered and excessively detailed HUD and menu elements make the game overwhelming and claustrophobic. This effectively ruins split screen multiplayer- one of the most fun ways to play the game- and makes solo play less comfortable. The unique art style makes distinguishing objects from one another an unnecessary strain on the eyes. This is a particular issue in combat situations. Rendering issues often make textures look blurry. Environments vary more than the first game, but structures, clutter and boxes still appear generic and over-used. Basic additions like increased character customization, expanded skill trees, and 'Bada**' ranks make the game more interesting, but feel more like minor changes than defining of characteristics of a full-blown sequel. That said, the exciting gameplay from the original remains intact, paired with new characters, enemies, and adventures.
Overall, the game feels to be a repackaging of the first installment, but persists as a moderately enjoyable experience.
And now it's time to dissect this horrible review:
1. If one looks at the time that the review was posted, September 18, 2012 at 04:29 PM, we can discern a few things. It took at least 15-20 minutes to write this review so that puts his starting time somewhere around 4:00-4:15PM. If we assume that he went to the midnight release of the game and the store in which he bought was approximately 5-15 minutes away from his house that puts the time in which he started playing the game around 12:15. If he played nonstop through the game from 12:15-4:15, that gives us at least 16 hours of the game. However, most sane people sleep for approximately 8 hours a day, which brings the number down further to 8 hours of gameplay. Including estamated time for bathroom breaks and food breaks, we are looking at about 7 hours of gameplay for this review. Hardly enough to call this a "legitimate review." Professional reviewers spend on average 40+ hours with a game (or complete the game) before even beginning their review of the game they have been playing. So compare a measely 7 hours (on a good estimate) with the 40+ hours of a good review. Already we have established that this guy has not played enough of the game to review it well.
2. Let's approach his claim that the HUD (Heads Up Display) in Borderlands 2 is overly excessive and detailed. Here's a screenshot from the original Borderlands:
 |
| Inobrtrusive, yet unhelpful in the directional sense. |
Notice that the screenshot shows the basic layout of the HUD. We have the special ability, health and shield levels in the lower left hand corner. In the lower center, we have the compass and level/XP indicator. And on the lower right side we have grenades, grenade type, and ammo count. In the upper right-hand corner, the current mission is displayed to the player. Overall, this HUD is pretty sparse when it comes to communicating what is going on in the perspective of the player.
 |
| Still unobtrusive, but with a tiny mini-map. |
Now lets look at a screenshot of Borderlands 2: notice all of the elements that were previously mentioned can be found in this screenshot. There's a bit more colour in the HUD elements, but nothing truly different about them can be seen. As for the gun stats located in the center right, those appear when a different gun is chosen, and dissapear quite quickly. The only new element added to the HUD is the minimap (the player names can be found in the original Borderlands as well; see top left hand corner). This is a definite improvement over the compass. In the original Borderlands, Players had to move in and out of the main menu in order to find where their objective lay. Now the player can glance at the minimap, find a general layout of the surrounding area and head in the general direction of thier next objective. Obtrusive, I think not.
3. Let's address his issue of the enemies blending into the background of the game. Admittedly it was at times difficult to locate enemies in the original Borderlands as the colour scheme seemed to be that of "Brown, brown and more brown." Here's some screenshots to prove what I mean:
 |
| Brown, brown, brown... OOH LOOK! YELLOW! |
 |
| Brown with a bit of blue. |
As you can see, the colour scheme was very bland. It was a great game, but not much in the realm of scenery. The locations included a desert, a wasteland, some canyons and a coastline. None of those lent themselves to a more colourful palette. However in Borderlands 2, the colour scheme is completely revamped and has the inclusion of blues, greens, and even purples in the landscape. Take a look at some of the screenshots:
 |
| Spiderants - I hated those things. So hard to kill. |
 |
| Oooh look, blues! And I can see the enemies! |
 |
| Your head on a Buddah statue... Really Markus? Really? |
3. Student-Athlete claims that the set pieces are tightly cluttered with each other. I hate to belabor this point, but that is part of the charm of Borderlands. Pandora (the location in which Borderlands 2 is set) is supposed to be a wasteland, settled by bandits and wild, feral creatures. That is what makes Pandora such an intriguing place to visit. The areas that haven't been taken over by Hyperion (the big, bad company in the game) are supposed to look hand-built with whatever scrap material people could get their hands on. And it adds a certain flair to the landscape. Yes, some of the set pieces may be used again, but one has to understand, in a world where everyone makes their own shelter, of course there will be some repetition.
4. The expanded character trees are completely different than their original counterparts. Zer0, the assasin has an emphasis on sniping and melee kills. His "Deception" skill plants a holograph of himself to distract enemies as he closes in for a kill or sneaks away to locate a better sniping position. Mordecai, the sniper from the previous game had a different emphasis. While he had an emphasis on sniper rifles, Mordecai also had an emphasis on pistols, be they repeaters or revolvers. His "bloodwing" skill allowed him to throw out a bird of prey that would home in on enemies and cause them massive elemental and physical damage. Both character has a completely different emphasis and playstyle.
Dig deeper into the characters of the new game and you'll find that Axton, the commando, has an emphasis on support, with his "Scorpio Turret 2.0" skill. Maya, the siren, deals massive elemental damage with her "Phaselock" ability and is built to handle large groups of enemies at a time while also providing the ablities of a medic for the vault hunters. Salvador, the gunzerker, has an emphasis on weaponry with his "Gunzerking" skill, and is tailored towards players who swap weapons quite often and love to be in the middle of the fray. Each character has a completely different feel than their predecessor. Dig into the character profiles of the original Borderlands cast and you'll find that Brick, the bezerker was focused on melee and rocket launchers with his abilities. Lilith, the siren, was focused on elemental damage and stealth with her abilites, but unlike her successor, did not have an emphasis on healing. It was Roland, the soldier, who had an entire branch of his ability tree focused on healing, as well as an emphasis on shotguns and assult rifles with his ablilities.
With these arguments I have refuted everything that "Student-Athlete" has put forward, proving that his review of an 8.00 was not well given. I admit that in the past I have given some pretty biased reviews myself, but nothing of this horrible caliber.
I will end my review of this review with this simple statement:
If you're going to do a review of a game, make sure that it's unbiased and you have played enough of the game to know what the heck you're talking about. If you haven't done this, pleas shut your trap (I'm looking at you MW3 naysayers).
Comments
Post a Comment