I wasn’t going to comment on this, but I can’t help myself. It’s a review of the Super Mario All-Stars Collector’s Edition that Nintendo just released, and they gave it a big fat F. I’m not going to break out the whole article; I’d just like to call attention to a few choice passages.
Super Mario All-Stars Limited Edition fails on every conceivable level, and a few inconceivable ones, too.
I know, I know. You’ve heard it before. But still: that is some terrible fucking writing right there. That’s like sub-Baylessian shit. You’re closing in on Woody Paige territory, A.V. Club.
Other than the option to use the Wii controller, the game is exactly as it was in 1993, when the ability to save your game on Nintendo titles was revolutionary. All-Stars Limited Edition touts "enhanced graphics and updated sound from the Super NES game," which at the time meant rounding Mario’s 8-bit exterior and adding smiles to background clouds. It killed the throwback feel of the games in 1993, and it makes the game look and sound sad today.
Of course, we’ll gloss over the part where he straight-up lies about the graphical changes made to All-Stars, and jump right on into the meat of this point: this moron thinks the 1993 overhaul of the graphics and sound in Super Mario Bros. was a bad thing. And for some reason he gets paid to write about video games.
The games, of course, are great, as they have always been.
Let that sink in.
The games, of course, are great, as they have always been.
The games, of course, are great, as they have always been.
The games, of course, are great, as they have always been.
The games, of course, are great, as they have always been.
The games are great! So we’ll give them an F. These people get paid to review video games.
In fact, they’re great right now, sold separately in the WiiWare store with actual retro graphics—for a much lower price.
Three points, here:
• On Wiiware, they’re five bucks each. That’s $20 total, which isn’t "much lower" the the $30 Nintendo’s charging for the collection, which has updated graphics, saving, a soundtrack CD (which you were apparently offended by), and a "history of Mario" booklet (which, also, you were apparently offended by).
• SNES graphics count as retro now. I’m sorry they’re not retro enough for hipster faggots such as yourself, but they’re still retro. Also, you’ve alternated this whole article between complaining that they upgraded the graphics in the first place and complaining that they didn’t upgrade them again.
• Do you see where it’s called "Collector’s Edition?" That’s what it is, champ: it’s an edition for collectors. Like, a limited-run thing bundled with extras and aimed at enthusiasts.
I’m serious. Why do you people get paid? It boggles the fucking mind. How can a game reveiwer come right out and admit that a game is great — that a game is, in fact, four separate great games — and give it the lowest possible grade and not get fired? How can a game reviewer tell multiple obvious lies in a game review and not get fired?
Here’s the real lowdown on the Mario All-Stars Collector’s Edition, from somebody who won’t give it an F just because it’s not free or on the Xbox: it’s fine. If you’re a Mario collector, or you kind of want to play Mario All-Stars but your SNES copy’s from fucking 1993 and the battery doesn’t work anymore, it’s exactly what you want. It’s nothing new, but for a $30 collector’s item with some great games on it, I mean, what’s the problem?
December 28th, 2010
Posted by
Darien |
Games |
no comments
You’d think that, by now, somebody other than me would have noticed how hopeless the A.V. Club’s game journalism is. By which I mean whoever’s in charge of paying these people to write ridiculously bad articles. By which I mean articles like this one.
It’s a "top ten games of the year" list, and, I’ll admit right upfront, not all of the choices are terrible. Two of them aren’t even Xbox games, which is like a bold step into the unknown for these idiots. There’s a dark lining lurking beneath this silver cloud, though, because, even though not all of the choices are terrible, you better believe every single word they have to say about them is. Is it pretentious? Vapid? Overwritten? You be the judge!
Is the gaming "awards season" dead?
Whoops, I should have marked that as a spoiler. I guess there’s no question about its overwritten, pretentious vapidity anymore.
Five of The A.V. Club games writers’ top six games of 2010 were released by the end of July, turning the industry’s usual autumn Game Of The Year slugfest into something of an anticlimax (at least around these parts).
Editor wanted. Apply within.
The reality is that 2010 was an unusually good year from start to finish.
Many, many people have noted this. Some of them even took a break from all their noting and played a few of the unusually good games! Not these guys, though.
There were even pleas among the games staff to make this a Top 20 list.
Oh sweet merciful lord I would kill myself if I had to wade through twenty of these awful writeups. Thank you, video game Jesus.
Instead, we went through two rounds of voting—with writers assigning a total of 100 points across their 10 favorite games, Pazz & Jop style—to whittle our favorites down to the list you see here.
I guess maybe "Pazz & Jop style" means something to idiots. To me? All it means is "we contrived a ridiculously complicated system that resulted in a shitload of ties, and then we numbered them wrong."
Because of ties, it’s a Top 11 instead of a Top 10, but this year felt about 10 percent better than usual, so we’re okay with that.
This year was a lot more like 60% better than usual, but I don’t expect you idiots to know that. Since you don’t play any games, or really follow the game industry very much.
And since gaming doesn’t have to be all about the major studios, this year we’ve also honored five games that appeared in the Sawbuck Gamer column over the past 12 months. These more modest titles are unlikely to crack many game-of-the-year lists, but they’re still worthy of a second look.
Two of the games on your main list are indie titles, dipshits. I mean, really. And the indie scene was super fucking strong in 2010, and only appears to be getting stronger. If anybody here in the grim darkness of the far future still thinks gaming is "all about the major studios," he clearly doesn’t pay attention to games. And, thus, probably works for the A.V. Club.
9 (tie). Vanquish
Xbox. Also, you gave it a B+ when it first came out.
Too many games come bloated with unnecessary features or modes that detract (and distract the development team) from the main event: the single-player campaign.
Quite a few of them will be making an appearance later on in this list. Oh, also, is there some rule that says the single-player campaign must be the "main event?" Because it seems to me I’ve played a fair few games with lacklustre single-player campaigns and super fun alternate modes.
Vanquish is not one of those games. It’s a ridiculous joyride and also an unapologetically lean adventure that has you sliding around on your knees in outer space, puffing on cigarettes, and firing off headshots on skyscraper-tall robots.
Mmm. Empty sentences. The bread-and-butter of terrible writers who get paid by the word.
Little gets in the way of the relentless gunplay, which is refreshing amidst a year of over-intellectualizing blowing up crap in a videogame.
You mean an "unusually good" year of over-intellectualizing blowing up crap. Which, I mean… did that happen? Fucking FlingSmash came out this year, man. That’s as un-intellectualized an example of blowing up crap as I can think of offhand. You know, assuming that means anything. Which I’m not so sure it does.
Best of all, Vanquish doesn’t overstay its welcome. It’s disposable fun, sure, but more memorable and enjoyable because of it.
"Best of all, it’s really short, which makes it easy to review if you don’t really like video games."
9 (tie). World Of Warcraft: Cataclysm
Obligatory WOW nod. About which you have nothing to say. You gave it an A in the initial review.
World Of Warcraft: Cataclysm significantly improves the game, whether you’re at Level 1 or Level 85.
I have to agree here. The pre-Cataclysm level 85 content was pretty lacking.
With the update, old zones have gotten a much-needed overhaul, bringing them up to speed with the graphics and gameplay innovations introduced in the expansion’s predecessors, Burning Crusade and Wrath Of The Lich King.
Looks better than that. Also plays better than that. I’d say, if I were forced to, that, actually, the old zones have been brought up to speed with the graphic and gameplay of the expansion’s self, you insufferable twit.
There’s fantastic flavor for the two new races, and the high-level content is appropriately epic, with your character befriending and battling gods and ancient powers as the world around you seethes and burns.
Great prose there, Sergeant Major Purple. Also: World of Warcraft has involved "befriending and battling gods and ancient powers" — which, I guess, are two different things these days — since launch.
There’s nothing revolutionary enough about Cataclysm to change a hater’s mind, but there’s plenty to get any fan hooked all over again.
I don’t know, man. I think "completely redesigned play experience" might just be enough to change a hater’s mind. But what do I know? I don’t have a master’s degree in awesome from the University of Game Review.
9 (tie). Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood
Xbox. You gave this an A- when it first came out.
A few sequels this year—like Crackdown 2 and Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II— were thin attempts to squeeze a few more dollars out of an existing development team before shutting the whole operation down. Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood defied that trend, broadening the horizons of an already-exceptional game, Assassin’s Creed II.
That’s a "trend?" Half-assed sequels? Okay. So while you’re ranting about whatever, I’d like to point out that this is the only game in this whole article that has a decent fucking screenshot. Seriously, have you seen these? I have never seen a video game article illustrated so incompetently before. The first one’s not even in the right place in the text, for pity’s sake.
The single-player story, which follows an aging Ezio as he transforms neck-stabbing into more of a team sport, is a fun journey.
Have I mentioned that your writing is garbage? Because: holy shit. The first half of that sentence is an epic journey toward a terrible, hacky joke, and then you clearly didn’t have any idea where you were going with it, and just smacked on that four-word phrase with the verb in it so it would scan properly. Awful.
The real bonus is the multiplayer mode.
Oh? Let’s talk about something real quick:
Too many games come bloated with unnecessary features or modes that detract (and distract the development team) from the main event: the single-player campaign.
Remember that? Remember when you wrote that? It was like two paragraphs ago. Seriously, guys, you’ve written two reviewlettes that contradict one another. In the same article. Two paragraphs apart.
Ubisoft avoided the BioShock 2 trap and created something that made sense for the broader game: a tense hunt through the streets of Rome where all the players have an assassination target—and a target on their backs.
Well thank god for that. I hate it when the ridiculous tacked-on multiplayer gimmick mode doesn’t fit with the lore of the single-player mission.
8. Super Mario Galaxy 2
A three-way-tie at 9 and then an 8. I think you guys might not understand how to write a top-ten list. Super Mario Galaxy 2 you gave an A initially.
The medium’s most enduring experience remains the perfectly timed leap and subsequent landing found in any Mario game.
What? How is that more "enduring" than, like, smashing a headcrab with a crowbar in Half-Life? Or uppercut-juggling somebody in Mortal Kombat? Or scrolling screenfulls of text in some boring-as-shit screen reader adventure? Do you know what words mean? Because it’s not clear that you do.
It’s been around since 1985, and if Super Mario Galaxy 2 is any indication, it won’t lose its novelty any time soon.
The first game to involve Mario making perfectly-timed leaps — and, no less, subsequently landing from those leaps! — came out in 1981. But, yeah, I think everybody but you has found that the novelty involved in pressing a button to make Mario jump wore off years ago. Nowadays we’re more keen on having interesting things to do with the jumping, yeah?
This follow-up to the 2007 original hits on plot points that anyone can recite by heart: Bowser is back. Peach is kidnapped. Mario must rescue her. Mario has a few new ho-hum suits at his disposal, but the real draw, in addition to those aforementioned leaps and landings, is the white-knuckle platforming action.
So the best part, besides all the jumping, is the platforming. Okay then. Good to know.
6 (tie). Fallout: New Vegas
Xbox. Got an A-, yet is ahead of two games that were rated A.
Bugs be damned.
If you say so, champ. I guess those of us who have to pay for games will just have to disagree with you about that.
Fallout: New Vegas is a meaty, quirky, and all-around mean follow-up to Fallout 3. There’s no touchy-feely parental relationship to weigh the plot down.
You know what that section needs? Some adjectives that don’t mean anything in the context they’re being used in.
And as a courier who got killed for the package they were delivering, players aren’t trying to save the world.
Nice segue from singular to plural there. Sure you wouldn’t like to borrow an editor? Don’t ask Yahoo — they’re all out.
Rather, the game is about survival, revenge, and comeuppance. Serving up those particular dishes is more complicated than it might seem, thanks to a tangled web of quests and conflicting allegiances. Players could easily get lost trying to work out all the angles. That’s the point.
The point is for the players to get lost? I think you may have the wrong idea either of what games are about, or of what words mean. Frankly, I’m having a bit of difficulty determining which.
6 (tie). Deadly Premonition
Xbox. You didn’t review this when it first came out.
There are few games that exemplify a designer’s ambition outpacing their skill more than Access Games’ Deadly Premonition.
I’m assuming you’re not counting every game I’ve ever made, right? Or, like, Duke Nukem Forever. Actually, now that I think about it, that’s not really a compliment, stupid.
The open-world horror game is at times staggering in its incompetence.
I’m not sure which is a bigger insult: saying that a game is "staggering in its incompetence" or saying that a game is an "open-world horror game." But one thing I do know: putting any game that fits that description not only on this list but halfway up this list proves that you people are staggering in your incompetence.
The textures covering the landscape of Greenvale, Washington wouldn’t look out of place in a budget Nintendo 64 game, and the zombie-shooting sequences serve mostly as a barrier between the player and the fun parts of the game.
So it’s boring and ugly. Great. You’re really selling me on this one.
That said, Deadly Premonition offers something downright inspiring for every one of its technical shortcomings. There’s an ugly world thick with idiosyncrasies and history, a vast cast of memorable weirdoes, and a fascinating lead in Agent Francis York Morgan.
So you got nothing, then? No ability to explain why you stuck this stinkbug on your list? Its Metacritic score is 68. That’s pretty fucking bad.
It’s better than getting to play Twin Peaks; it’s like getting to be Dale Cooper.
You know what else is better than getting to play Twin Peaks? Not playing fucking Twin Peaks.
5. Limbo
Xbox. You gave it an A-. Also, this is an indie game.
This small, damp smudge of a game arrived, inappropriately enough, in the beach-going months of summer.
What? It’s inappropriate for games to come out in the summer? Or is it just games that are "damp" that shouldn’t come out in the summer? Fuck off, Wave Race 64!
That partially explains the surprising, out-of-nowhere impact Limbo had.
It didn’t have much impact, mostly on account of ten thousand other indie games came out this year that were exactly the same. To be fair, though, I think this is the only one that made it to the Xbox, so it’s not like you played any of the rest of them.
The simple mechanics, spare black-and-white aesthetic, and exposition-free narrative made Limbo less of a traditional game experience and more of a psychological—or perhaps even psychotic—episode.
Do you fools have any idea how many games I played this year that were exposition-free black-and-white simple-mechanic-ed "episodes?" Seriously, there were a fucking lot of them. This is like a modern version of those pretentious arthouse movies where everybody sits around and gives each other long looks and doesn’t speak.
Helping this blinking shadow-boy through a dank forest on a quest to find his lost sister turns Limbo into the video game the Brothers Grimm never made.
Other video games on the list of video games the Brothers Grimm never made: all video games.
4. Heavy Rain
Playstation 3! Wow. You idiots are branching out. Also, you gave this an A-, too. Still waiting on the explanation of why the two games you rated A are down at the bottom of the list.
Nothing about Heavy Rain made sense because it didn’t resemble any other game. And it still doesn’t. It’s a story-driven title that puts you in control of four flawed characters whose lives are all connected to a serial killer on the loose.
So it was a long fucking movie with no game involved, and it didn’t make any sense. Awesome. Game of the year, as far as I’m concerned.
Speaking of controls, everything is a series of quick-time events and the joysticks alone don’t make your character move.
Wait, that sounds familiar… where have I seen that design aesthetic before…
Even more unusual, your actions as these characters yield irreversible, rippling consequences.
OH NOES! The ripples are coming for me!
Though not a perfect game, it’s not hyperbole to say that Heavy Rain pushes gaming toward the next notch on its evolutionary chart.
As long as the "next notch" in the evolution of gaming is fucking Dragon’s Lair. Which is what this is.
Risky and emotionally charged, Heavy Rain shows that we’ve only begun to scratch the surface of what’s possible in what we all can expect from games.
My favourite part about this sentence — other than the fact that the last half of it isn’t even coherent, which is pretty excellent — is that apparently he’d consider Steel Magnolias to be a huge step forward in gaming, what with the emotional charges and the risk and shit. Is gameplay part of this process? Unclear!
3. Red Dead Redemption
Xbox. Finally another A, though!
The developers at Rockstar aren’t perfect.
True dat. They tend to make really really boring open-world wandering games that idiots like you spooge all over because you think they’re "important."
Their dialogue tends to be painfully on-the-nose, their philosophizing on American values rarely transcends dorm-room levels of sophistication, and their lack of an editing eye leaves too much fat in the final product (case in point: Red Dead Redemption’s overlong Mexican sojourn).
Yeah, also, the games aren’t very much fun once the shock value of running down heavily ethnic pedestrians in a muscle car wears off.
So how the hell does Red Dead manage to be so freaking good? One reason is John Marston, the conflicted mercenary who holds our attention as he seeks absolution, despite the Sisyphean futility of his quest.
Ah yes — the cutscenes. Thank god for those. Where would a game be without cutscenes? Not on this list, that’s for fucking sure.
Also, check-plus on "Sisyphean futility." Who cares if it’s redundant as long as it’s pretentious!
Rockstar’s social commentary may be ham-fisted, but they know how to tell the story of one man.
Which would be great, if they were writing books or movies. But they make games. Perhaps it’s time to start talking about gameplay, yes?
Another key: the game’s entrancing sense of place.
Which is how the effete pseudo-intellectuals at the A.V. Club say "graphics."
After earning perennial praise for its buzzing cityscapes in the Grand Theft Auto series, Rockstar’s ability to evoke the beautiful desolation of the West may be its greatest triumph.
Rockstar’s greatest triumph: empty space.
2. Super Meat Boy
Xbox. A.
Indie developers Edmund McMillen and Tommy Refenes have heard tell of this "motion control" business. They have a vague awareness of "casual gaming" and other buzzworthy trends.
I really think these dudes think they’re not being colossal assholes when they write shit like this. But, seriously, it’s like you’re calling them fucking cavemen.
The thing is, they don’t care. Gleefully frenetic, difficult, and family-unfriendly, Super Meat Boy is a virtuoso example of games’ hoariest form: the 2-D platformer.
"Hoary" means "old," stupid. And the 2D platformer is not the oldest type of game. It’s not even close. Seriously, just stick to words you understand. If… there are any.
The sentiment is old-school, but the level design is decidedly fresh. Practically every level—and there are hundreds—has some signature twist of ingenuity, such that it’s hard not to admire Team Meat’s creativity, even as you’re hurtling into that deadly buzzsaw for the thousandth time.
Blah blah blah blah fresh fresh fresh signature deadly buzzword. Got it.
1. Mass Effect 2
Xbox. At least your number one got an A originally.
Mass Effect 2 pushes the limits of the traditional role-playing game, jettisoning the fiddly details of loot, stats, and gear into the cold vacuum of space.
That’s a pretty weird thing for Mass Effect 2 — a shooter — to do. But okay.
Good riddance. This streamlining allows players to invest more emotion in the plot and the many decisions they must make as they assemble a ragtag team of allies to confront an alien threat.
What? No it fucking doesn’t. It just means we don’t have to deal with the nag screen telling us to convert the loot to omni-gel. Not having stats means more emotional involvement? That’s beyond crazy.
The plot, cribbed shamelessly from Seven Samurai, has been thoroughly explored by filmmakers, but in a game where your choices determine who will live and who will die, the venerable story feels fresh again.
No. No it does not. The story in Mass Effect 2 is fucking stupid. Also? Your choices may determine who lives and who dies, but only in very weird, nonsensical ways; the first Mass Effect did a much, much better job of exploiting that angle.
That’s it, gang! The top eleven games of 2010, as chosen by stupid people who don’t play video games. Did they ever mention gameplay? Not once! They used limp-wristed euphemisms for graphics a few times, but mostly, those games rule because they were short and had lots of cutscenes.
Seriously, why are these people not fired?
December 28th, 2010
Posted by
Darien |
Games |
no comments
