Rayman Pirate-Community

Have you ever enjoyed a game that got one out of ten?

Lowest rating of a game I enjoyed was 3/10 for Chef's Luv Shack. Short but funny game.

spiraldoor wrote:Have you ever enjoyed a game that got one out of ten?

are there games with that rating?

Yes. Examples of that would be Teletubbies for the PS1, Superman 64, and pretty much every "game" that's about a pop singer.

StaceyW wrote:Yes. Examples of that would be Teletubbies for the PS1, Superman 64, and pretty much every "game" that's about a pop singer.

oh, so the E.T game was rated -10 right?

I think it was before the "reviews". And it would get 0 outta 10.

If nobody could enjoy a game with a rating of one, them you must agree that reviews are not completely worthless, and that some games actually are inherently bad?

The reviews are good when we talk about graphics and usually sound - they're pretty useless when we talk about gameplay and usually story.

spiraldoor wrote:It isn't all up to opinion. Can anyone honestly say that they enjoyed a game which got an average score of, say, two out of ten?

Yes they can, because guess what idiot: a rating is just the reviewers opinion and only an idiot would consider a reviewer's score as a be-all-end-all opinion of a game. The numbers for a review dont mean shit, you're supposed to read it and based on what you read consider whether the game is worthy of a purchase or not. Focusing on just the numbers is how we get idiots like you in the first place. Idiot. Everyone enjoys different things for different reasons. I fucking love playing Bubsy 3d because of how bad it was. Its enjoyable to me because of how laughably incompetent the game is. I can honestly tell you I enjoyed Bubsy 3D. Wait whats this? One review out of hundreds gave it a 1/10? LOOKS LIKE I CAN NO LONGER ENJOY IT. TELL ME HOW TO THINK REVIEW MAN, I SURRENDER MY BRAIN TO YOUR NUMBERS.

All of this arguing over opinions as fact aside, look what I found:



Now as to what FY10 and FY09 actually mean, I have no idea.

FY could stand for fiscal year. So maybe fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year 2010? I think i read somewhree that fiscal year 09 is anywhere from March 2009 through February 2010.

That would make sense as Rabbids TV Party is considered part of the Rayman series.
Ah well.

What? Should they do a Rayman game?

New trailer, but still no gameplay.


EDIT-
IGN has new videos along with gameplay videos. Cue posts of "THIS LOOKS LIKE DUMBEST GAME EVER" and 3 page long arguments that have nothing to do with the game

THIS LOOKS LIKE THE DUMBEST GAME EVER
*starts 3 page long argument that has nothing to do with the game*

No, really, the humor looks pretty bad, but the graphics and gameplay seem good enough for the Wii. That non-gameplay trailer looks a lot better though, but that's probably because of the bigger resolution... and the better music. Honestly, the music in that gameplay trailer made me turn off my speakers. Yes, it was that bad.

Not being funny but...

that looks unplayable.

StaceyW wrote: that looks unplayable.

Like how so. Because while I can actually see Drol's complaints (even though I personally love the music I can see how others can downright hate it) this one doesn't seem to make any sense to me. The gameplay footage is wildly varied, but I dont see how this looks any more unplayable than say the missle and waterskiing segments from Rayman 2.

Lijik wrote:

spiraldoor wrote:It isn't all up to opinion. Can anyone honestly say that they enjoyed a game which got an average score of, say, two out of ten?

Yes they can, because guess what idiot:

Personal insults? Please.

Lijik wrote:a rating is just the reviewers opinion and only an idiot would consider a reviewer's score as a be-all-end-all opinion of a game.

The reviewers are game experts who know what they are talking about. If you read reviews you will know that they carefully assess every apect of the game and I see no reason to distrust their analyses.

Lijik wrote:The numbers for a review dont mean shit, you're supposed to read it and based on what you read consider whether the game is worthy of a purchase or not. Focusing on just the numbers is how we get idiots like you in the first place. Idiot.

Again you attempt to mix personal insults with your feeble argument. I think I'd bet GameSpot answer this one:

GameSpot FAQs wrote:"How can you possibly assign a numeric rating to a game? Shouldn't your reviews speak for themselves?"

Along with our review summaries, our ratings provide our audience with an at-a-glance assessment of a game's relative quality. Some people have neither the time nor the inclination to read our full reviews, and we respect that. Also, some people want a shorter assessment, which is why our review summaries tend to contain all the key points of the evaluation. We take great caution in administering our ratings, because we know a rating scale needs to be relatively consistent to be valuable.

Lijik wrote:Everyone enjoys different things for different reasons. I fucking love playing Bubsy 3d because of how bad it was. Its enjoyable to me because of how laughably incompetent the game is. I can honestly tell you I enjoyed Bubsy 3D.

That implies to me that you enjoy poor games better than good ones, which is an odd attribute and not one which I intend to argue with.

Lijik wrote:Wait whats this? One review out of hundreds gave it a 1/10? LOOKS LIKE I CAN NO LONGER ENJOY IT. TELL ME HOW TO THINK REVIEW MAN, I SURRENDER MY BRAIN TO YOUR NUMBERS.

First of all: I never said anything about "one review out of hundreds". I don't know where you got that from. I'm talking more about "reviews in general". If you read a hundred different reviews by different reviewers of a single game, and they all give it an exceedingly low score, the chances are the game is a piece of shit.

I end this daft discussion with another GameSpot quote:

GameSpot FAQs wrote:"Wait, reviews are just opinions. Right?"

Actually, we don't think so. We make no excuses for our verdicts about games and believe our reviews stand for themselves. While our reviews, of course, do contain an element of subjectivity to them, we see the process of reviewing games as one that primarily involves the reporting of facts. To an extent, we naturally color these facts based on our own experiences of having spent much time playing other games in the past, but we make every effort to look at every game on its own merits, and we describe each game in the most factual terms possible. To this end, in the rare event that one of our reviews contains a factual inaccuracy, we will correct the inaccuracy and will acknowledge it in an editor's note that's appended to the end of the review.

It looks like you're just gonna swerve about and not be able to handle it too well like in Super Mario Sunshine where you're riding on those mini bloopers [god I hated that]. Hope there's points where you can run on foot, I prefer that sort of thing much more.

Spiraldoor: You know what. This has nothing to do with this thread, and I'm tired and unlike you I dont have the time to go point by point and nitpick at things.

You win.

There, happy? Can you stop starting arguments that have nothing to do with this topic (or at least being the main machine the keeps the arguments going) now please? Its like the third time you've done this. I really hate backseat modding, but damn. Its like you cant even read what the topic is everytime you click it. Its not like we dont have actual game information to talk about now.

StaceyW wrote:It looks like you're just gonna swerve about and not be able to handle it too well like in Super Mario Sunshine where you're riding on those mini bloopers [god I hated that]. Hope there's points where you can run on foot, I prefer that sort of thing much more.

To be honest I really don't see that aside from the out of control plane engine (which makes sense cause its an out of control plane engine).

spiraldoor wrote:The reviewers are game experts who know what they are talking about. If you read reviews you will know that they carefully assess every apect of the game and I see no reason to distrust their analyses.

But that's what reviews are: analyses, or, if you like, opinions. The point Lijik was trying to address (although I found it very difficult to extract as the whole argument seems more of a personal attack) was that reviewers' ratings are mere OPINIONS and shouldn't be taken for hard irrefutable scrutiny as to whether a game is shit or not. Their opinions are often reflective of the game's qualities, but their views are certainly not equal to the outlook of everyone else. It's all a matter of taste; gaming reviews can't convert personal views on any level.

@ Lijik: While I agree with what you're saying, bombarding your arguments with pathetic attacks won't do any justice to the discussion. As per the core of this debate, opinion, spiraldoor is open to his own view and can display his thoughts on what you have said. You need to learn to respect his and others' opinion just as they do yours, instead of just uselessly hurling insults. If you can't construct your arguments decently, I'll prevent you from posting altogether.