My biggest problem with game writers is misinformation. Like in the Fire Emblem thread we're reading and posting previews/impressions of the game.
And then I post a US Gamer preview which says:
If you loved the intricate maps and hardcore tactics of Fire Emblem Fates: Conquest, you won't really find them in Three Houses, at least not where I am in the story. This is a tactics game that's as much about grinding as it is about strategy.
In Three Houses, there is no Weapon Triangle.
Personally, I'd rather Three Houses focus on top-quality map design than building overpowered characters who can brute force their way through maps.
But this just might be where Fire Emblem is now. Three Houses makes no bones about putting character customization first.
When the actual battles come, you can pretty easily travel in one big ball of death and grind your way to the boss.
But then the Kotaku preview says:
It is within abilities that you’ll find the familiar Fire Emblem concept of the weapons triangle, which is a rock/paper/scissors-esque delineation of which weapons are strong or weak against others. As characters gain mastery at certain types of weapons, they’ll sometimes earn abilities that make them stronger against particular weapons. If your axe-wielding character has learned the ability Lancebreaker, it’s probably a good idea to equip that before any battle where you know there will be a lot of enemy lance users.
Like this person got paid to spout complete misinformation. And you're using these preview precisely for their information.
It makes navigating game writing a thick, milky soup of what the fuck especially if you're talking about games with mechanical depth.
This goes beyond reviews, unfortunately.
And never forget, it was game journos who demanded an easy mode for Sekiro because "this is ableist to make a game people with disabilities can't play" because they struggled to beat the game.
something that still pisses me off to this day is how Jim Sterling poisoned the well with his "100% objective review"
all the way back in 2010 now (jesus)
he wrote it as useless tongue in cheek garbage but in all honesty the objective information is the only reason TO read reviews
like nintex said
For example, when I read that Yoshi's Crafted World had a very low docked resolution and was easy as hell it quickly went to the 'bargain someday' list.
guess what this is independent of quality level/review score, it's just an objective fact which is good to know for whether you'd find the game acceptable or not
other aspects like this include number of party members in an RPG, whether XP is shared, encounter rate, skill system, complexity of inputs in a fighting game, number of puzzles in a puzzle game, complexity of weapon loadouts in shooters or action games, resultion, frame rate, load times, all kinds of things that shouldn't get tied back to some numerical score but can help you decide if you'd like the game or not
the 100% objective review would be actually useful information for the majority of people but that was deemed unacceptable by mr. prima donna game reviewer so we get subjective bullshit and also outright fabrications
