Ni no Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch Review
By all means, lots of opinion to be found in most things I say. That is the luxury of being just a regular gamer and not a reviewer, Ben. 🙂
No but seriously, I am so extremely average by nature that it's tragic: The meta score of any game is pretty much a failproof indicator of what I will think of the game. And if I don't like it despite the score, then I at least still understand the score it has.
But not so with FF13. Not even close. If I now wrote a "mini review" of the reasons why I thought it sucked, linearity would not have been mentioned. Linearity is like a luxury problem compared to what I were met with in that game.
It *is* also interesting to note that while FF13 received a much higher meta on the PS3 compared to the X360, with the FF13-2 the meta is almost identical across the two platforms. That, to me, is at least an indication that the PS3 reviewers might have been more influenced by the legacy of the franchise than the X360 reviewers, something that then got adjusted after FF13.
But - *ugh* - we will never get anywhere with discussing this. So I just hereby use my right as a private gamer to say that topping *my* list of most overrated game of this gen is indeed FF13. So there! 😉
Last edited by Beamboom on 1/24/2013 754 AM
Actually, the PS3 version is better than the 360 in graphics, XIII has a large data 45GB if I remembered correctly so they compressed something in the 360 version to fit it on their disc, I don't know how many. XIII-2 PS3 version was downgraded so they can fit it in one 360 disc, so the graphics suffered, XIII graphics is much better than XIII-2.
Last edited by homura on 1/24/2013 834 AM
That much storage space must have been used for video clips, Homura, and if that was the case only the cut scenes suffered.
I mean, there's no way there was like tens of gigs of textures. The PS3 only got 250mb of video ram. 🙂
Last edited by Beamboom on 1/24/2013 1134 AM
Everyone's opinion here on which games/genres are the best is purely subjective and 100% their opinion.
Ben you can't say that something is someones opinion in one sentence therefore invalid because you think they are biased. Then in the second sentence state your opinion like it is fact.
You didn't like the combat system too much, which was your opinion. I think Ni no kunis combat system is an amazing evolution of the JRPG genre.
Just because you think its too chaotic does not mean that it is too chaotic. All that says is that it is too chaotic for you, unless you can give a reason most JRPG fans would enjoy the game more if it was turn based or slower paced or whatever you think it should be.
Even if you could give such reasons they are only going to be based on what you subjectively like anyway. We know you like the slower nature of turn based combat, so anything you say about this combat system is going to be slightly biased.
WHICH IS FINE. It is a review it is supposed to be your opinion, and people who tend to value your opinion because they share a similar one are going to get more out of the review than someone who tends to like games you don't like and vice-versa.
That is why it is important to find a reviewer you can trust because you find you can relate to their opinion.
But this whole exchange between Ben, Beam, and Homura is just people saying their opinion is right and the others is wrong.
Also Ben don't tell me that reviews are not opinion. I know that they aren't 100% opinions as a professional reviewer you should be trying to look at it very objectively, but we are all human and in the end it does come back to your opinion on the game and experience with it. I've said this before but if I played the most technically perfect, and amazingly built RTS game I would want to give it a lower score because I wouldn't have as enjoyed it as much. But RTS fans would hail it as the second coming. My point is that everything has a subjective nature to it and telling people that their opinion is wrong compared to yours is like comparing dick sizes.
For the record I think an 8.5 is a great score, I haven't played enough of it to give it a score myself though.
xenris, I'd really wish you'd step off your soapbox for two seconds.
First, I never said reviews didn't contain opinion. I said they weren't entirely opinion, and they're not. Second, I said specifically that I didn't care what the combat mechanic was, and I gave OBJECTIVE reasons in the review for why it is not an elite system. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant; I could love it, but I'm not blind to the problems, like others (perhaps you).
I also know you want to think reviews are mostly opinion, which is flat out wrong. If you played a fantastic RTS and give it a lower score because you didn't like it, you have failed in your task as a reviewer, and are not correctly servicing the public. You can explain that you don't like it in the review, and maybe that it can affect the score a LITTLE. Any more than that does a colossal disservice to the quality of the game and those who made it.
Quality, if you haven't figured it out already, is NOT SUBJECTIVE. It isn't. It never is. We start thinking that, and we're all in very big trouble. I can draw you a picture. You might actually like it more than you like the Mona Lisa. Doesn't mean my picture is of a higher quality, now does it?
Lastly, I never said anyone's opinion is "wrong." I addressed objective falsehoods, such as saying the battle system in FFXIII is "nonsense." That's not Beamboom's opinion; that's an inaccurate assessment. Unappealing characters is purely subjective; badly developed characters is NOT. These are differences that you need to wrap your head around, obviously.
Read my post more thoroughly, I never said they were entirely opinionated I said in the end it comes down to your opinion of the game.
You can look at the technical stuff of a game, and it can be great but you might not enjoy the game, for one reason or another. Should you NOT reflect that in the review? I think it is a greater disservice to the public to give a game a good score because you think that that is what is should get even though you enjoyed it less. Example you said in Ni No Kuni that it was almost impossible to avoid the battles and that you got into way more than you wanted to. Well my experience with the demo was totally different. I frequently avoided fights on the world map, and only in dungeons where there spots where I had to fight because I couldn't sneak around. Again I could say your whole review is false and I am objectively right because when I played I didn't get into as many fights. Just like you saying that DQ8 didn't have a lot of random encounters? Good lord every couple of steps dude, and I recently lent it to a friend and watched him play it. Yup still a crap load of random encounters, but you claim that you could roam the land without any? Don't know what game you played, unless you constantly had holy water on your party.
Do we not play games to enjoy games? How can you say that your enjoyment of the game should only affect your score a little? The gameplay is the most important at the end of the day because it's a game. It brings it back to you having to rate it based on your enjoyment. People are going to have different levels of enjoyments for different genres and games based on how relatable the game is, how fun the game is and how good the graphics and sound is.
Ben the only reason you think that the Mona Lisa is of high quality is because you have heard that it is. You have no idea why it is held in such revere and I'm sure only staunch art critics could even begin to try to explain why it became so popular.
Quality has objective components, but at the end of the day no matter how good some body tells you something is, it is up to YOU to decide whether you like it or not.
Games are no different in this regard. I could tell you why mass effect 3 is of low quality, I could rip apart the game, show you reused assets, voice clips, cut quests, bugs, and an overall lack of polish compared to ME1 and ME2. These are not opinions but you would say that they are or that it is biased even if I showed you proof to your face, because what I don't have a gaming review website? Or you would say I'm entitled or whiny or un-pleasable or some other patronizing response you love to dish out to people in the comments section.
It is of value if someone who games to hear a totally honest review of how someone felt about a game they are interested in. Not because of the artistic merit of the game, but because of the human reviewing it who is most likely to have a similar experience to them.
THAT is why I said it is important to find a reviewer that you tend to agree with. That way they wont lead you astray in a review.
As for you not saying anyones opinion is wrong, um FF13s battle system could play itself for most of the game up until near the ending. There are playthroughs of people using auto battle for most of the game, and there are a lot of reasons why people hated the combat in FF13. Is they combat system nonsense? No but Beamboom thought it was and so do others so there is merit to that statement.
Saying that it was not Beambooms opinion but an inaccurate assessment is basically saying that is Beambooms wrong opinion.
I don't need to wrap my head around anything Ben, I understand there is more subjectivity to things in the world. Something that I think you should wrap your head around.
Last edited by xenris on 1/24/2013 113 PM
I may not remember DQVIII as well as I thought I did. I'll give you that. Either way, if I played it today and the encounters were higher than I wanted, it would be mentioned, as it was in this review. However, I never once said I "could roam the land without any" battles.
The only reason I "think" the Mona Lisa is any good is because people tell me it is? That's a common, lazy dodge. It's the equivalent of the extraordinarily dangerous stance that there is no quality in art, no objective talent to see. That just because somebody liked my artwork more, I am a better artist than Michelangelo. It devalues talent and is a colossal insult to genius. The Mona Lisa's status is irrelevant. I can't do it. I couldn't do it with ten thousand years of training because I don't have that ability within me.
You, however, are taking the stance that opinion supersedes talent, which is part of the reason WHY we don't have any Michelangelos or Mozarts today. We are teaching our children that talent and ability don't matter because everything is just all "opinion." It's just so easy to do, isn't it? To label everything opinion? Because that reflects the retarded, extremely catastrophic theory that everyone is all the same. That anyone can do anything.
It isn't true and never has been. My opinion should matter very little. You shouldn't give two sh*** about my personal preference when it comes to reviews. It's a total fallacy to do so. If we all have different opinions, what's the purpose of producing a review based entirely on opinion? What good does that do ANYONE? I can't dictate another's opinion nor would I want to. I'm here, as other experts in other fields are here, to tell you if the product is good. If it's a quality product. I cannot write a review on a five-star restaurant because I don't have that level of expertise. And I would NEVER expect people who read that review to take it seriously. You, apparently, would. And that's ridiculous.
"Nonsense" can be looked up in the dictionary easily enough. In no way would FFXIII's battle system fit that term. Other derogatory terms could be associated with it; nonsense is hardly one of them, which is why it's incorrect.
I hate to tell you this, but eventually you might learn- The world is not comprised entirely of gray, as I know some people would love to believe. Not everyone can do everything, quality is not dictated by personal opinion, and those who have expertise in certain areas are more qualified to talk about those areas than others. You can hide behind your rationale all you wish. It's an escape route. By all means, escape. I'll live in reality, thank you.
P.S. Don't bother with writing a novel in response. I won't read it; I'm very busy right now and based on your stance here, and your embarrassingly entitled stance on ME3, we are not going to see eye to eye. Let's just leave it. You want to erase quality from earth and claim everyone is the same...highly communistic and socialistic and WRONG but hey, you're entitled to say what you will.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 1/24/2013 319 PM
Thanks for using a straw man to attack my points.
Stop putting words into peoples mouths 🙂 By the way you use the word entitled I can tell you also believe in the gray relative value of things. For you do not care what the word entitled actually means. You use the word to slander people who you disagree with, to dismiss valid points as nothing more than childish whining.
I was disappointed with ME2 and ME3 because I expected a fully realized RPG in the same vein as ME1. But by no means does that mean that I felt entitled to it.
You should check out Gamespot's senior editor review for the game Xenris. The review persuaded me that he 'connected' with the experience and delivered the review hopeful investigators would be more interested in. It's amazing how perspectives alter based on a gmaes's ability to sell you it's world.
Similarly it was obvious of Assassins Creed 3 who bought the atmosphere and who didn't. Those who didn't, hammered the critical details, like bugs and policies of how an open world game ought to be, and those who did overlooked things, like its crappy combat and bugginess but enjoyed it a lot more. Perhaps the truth is somewhere inbetween 😉
Last edited by Temjin001 on 1/24/2013 859 PM
I actually hated this site's review of DQ8 and felt it was, in many cases, devoid of fact. But that wasn't Ben. Don't think he was even a writer here back then.
On the difference in graphics between the two systems, the graphics were essentially the same. The difference was caused by the xbox version being compressed more. So when it was extracted, it had more decompression to work through, so it definitely made things look not quite as smooth. There are comparisons online if you are interested enough.
Adding to the 360 FFXIII stuff. The FMV used Bink for compression, a terribly outdated compression system. It was significantly less rich in FMV bitrate. Also, the engine was very rough on 360 at the time so it literally rendered at a lower pixel resolution in game and it's frame rate suffered in the big green outdoor non hallway plains part (forget its name) =p
Apparently the 360 was brought up to snuff for XIII-2
Some people also need to know that 8.5 is a pretty good score . It s easy rating a game 9 + when doing a user review or postion his own opinion but a real review got lot s of stuff to take into account.
I might not agree about some stuff he said ( too many random encounter for example ) but that score is about right for me too .
FF13 score is another story tho :p
Haha, no. I talked to the guy at the counter about it. He went on about how it seems to be doing well, how his buddy had been going on about it, etc. Said he sold 4 during his morning shift of Tuesday.
I have no idea how many they had, though, as you say. lol. But the shelf it was stored on looked a bit disheveled and pillaged.