Staredit Network

I've decided we should have more activity in this forum, so I've decided to make a thread where everyone is allowed to review games, regardless of their system or genre.

The first matter is we need to agree on a review layout. Here's my general outline.

(Title)
System:
Genre:
Players:

Paragraph on the presentation of the game (graphics, music, design).

Paragraph on the plot of the game (originality, intrigue, complexity).

Paragraph on the gameplay of the game (variation, AI, depth)

(Score out of 3)
Presentation:
Plot:
Gameplay:

So here's one about Starcraft.

[center]Starcraft

System: PC, N64
Genre: Strategy
Players: 1-8[/center]

The graphics on Starcraft are outdated as of now. They are 2D sprites, but are able to rotate for a semi-3D look. Each unit is designed in a unique way, whether it's the mechanical tanks of the Terran, the semi-visible dark templar of the Protoss, or the protruding Zergling claws of the Zerg. The music is ambient and a mix of suspenseful and dramatic themes.

The plot switches focus on all the races, but ultimately leads to a major character named Kerrigan. The story is told from three different perspectives, which is interesting to hear. The character's themselves are unique in personality, from Jim Raynor's sense of determination, Zeratul's wisdom and Fenixs' bravery. There are many themes of betrayal and deception which leads players to the question: who can be trusted?

The gameplay of the game starts slow, but intensifies quickly. The gist of the game is collecting resources, cranking structures and units and wasting enemies. However, the element of strategy is needed to prevail against certain enemies. The AI in this game provides a decent challenge and is much more intelligent than of action games because it does not play in a linear fashion. Playing the game online increases replayability ever so more, because more options, such as custom maps become playable.

[center]Presentation: 2/3
Plot: 3/3
Gameplay: 3/3[/center]

I'd like your feedback or comments about this layout for improvement.

[center]World of Warcraft

System: PC
Genre: MMORPG
Players: 1 - 2500? Depends on server capacity.[/center]

Although the graphics of the game aren't regarded as top notch as compared to other games, you will feel right at home in this 3-D world. The design is excellent, bringing you to familiar places you played as a kid back in Warcraft I-III. The first thing going through your mind is: "Wow, so this is what X really is like.". The music effects are astonishing, bringing excellent ambient music with footsteps that you never tire to hear and a bear growling nearby. You'll rarely notice any music at all with so many music effects.

The plot... it is nearly impossible to talk in a general fashion about the plot because it is so large and it is changing constantly. You will always have something to do, be it kill a Boss in one of the many instances or collect some supplies, you will always have something to do in this massive world. You will feel how you contribute to your faction's war toward other factions.

Gameplay always starts slow in the starting village. It'll teach you the basics on how to play, quest, customize and many more things. But once you are out of the starting area(s), you will feel a much deeper sense of danger. You will always have to be on your toes and in alert for any enemies. You can always go into the Battlegrounds to kill your craving to kill the enemy and also to have fun. Or, you go into one of the many instances and kill a familiar Boss which you remember from the old days of Warcraft I-III.

[center]Presentation: 3/3
Plot: 2/3
Gameplay: 3/3[/center]

That seems like a good layout. But don't you think the score range is a bit small, I mean, 3 for each? It should be an even number, like 10? Maybe we could just use the IGN system.

[center]Chrono Trigger

System: SNES, PSONE
Genre: RPG
Players: 1[/center]

The graphics are on both SNES and PSOne still use conventional sprites, back in the 16-bit days of the SNES, with the PSOne have slightly more refined sprites and new cinematics. Yasunori Mitsuda composes the score of Chrono Trigger, with very smooth and ambient sounds, from the battle theme to the final theme against Lavos. The music provides a very relaxing and calm experince, great for any RPG fan, and has great transitions from battle music to overworld themes. Though outdated, Chrono Trigger's' presentation is still superb, even after all these years.

The plot was very revolutionary at the time of it's release. Multiple endings and a story that allowed each character a chance in the spotlight was new from the typical hero with sidekicks storyline. Of course, it's very similar, but provides a different experince which was refreshing to the RPG genre. Chrono Trigger centres around the perils of a group of adventurers that must travel back and forth in time in order to do right the events of time, and hopefully save the world from destruction of the mysterious and omnious Lavos. Chrono Trigger is often regarded as the RPG who created the idea of a silent protaginist, who never talked. When unlikely enemies become allies, and when trustful allies become enemies, the storyline of CT is one to be marvelled.

The gameplay is very enjoyable and interactive, which is good for any RPG. The game uses a system in which nearby enemies will attack you, and you will engage in an ATB battle right there and then, instead of moving to a generic battle arena. However, this can only occur in the game "dungeons," as the overworld maps do not contain enemies, which was common in RPGs of it's time. Chrono Trigger uses an ATB (Active Time Battle) system, which means after a select amount of time, characters have the chance to attack, cast techs, use items or defend. Once done so, your bar resets and you must wait until it is filled up once again to attack. Techs are special abilities learned by each character, in most cases, unique and diverse to them. Techs can be combined to create powerful attacks, which was revolutionary in the gaming industry back then. The game uses an event-based system for progression through the game, which will alter what characters say, do and act. The multiple endings of the game increases the replay value of the short RPG, and the NewGame+ feature.

[center]Presentation: 2.5/3
Plot: 2.5/3
Gameplay: 3/3[/center]

[center]POSTAL 2: Share The Pain[/center]

[center]System: Pc only[/center]
[center]Genre: Hardcore FPS[/center]
[center]Player: 1[/center]

The graphic of this game are just fine, you can recognise everything. The action take part in a small city in the middle of the nowhere. The music are just fine, put you in a great mood of gun fight action.


This game is awesome. The storyline is pretty weird compared to the whole game. Exemple, you have to get some milk. You have the choice the pay the casher or not. If you don't you'll have to face the consequences. You can replay the game and choose to be a total badass or a normal person living a ...almost normal life. The game is not complexe at all, you walk throught the city and kill some people if you want or need to.

The game is simple, it's a click and shoot game. No strategies, only Hardcore scenes of gun fight. There is some interactions with the objects around and well made puzzle. There is a lot of hidden things around. Just have to notice them.

[center]Presentation: 2.7/3[/center]
[center]Plot: 2.5/3[/center]
[center]Gameplay: 2/3[/center]

[center]Halo 2 and mappack[/center]

[center]System: Xbox and Xbox 360[/center]
[center]Genre: FPS[/center]
[center]Player: 1-2 Singleplayer 1-18 online[/center]

The graphics of the this game is great, but not so much when directly right up close to it. The music and audio is just amazing! The music/audio that is placed all around the game is just right. Voice overs are great as well. The new maps looks great, gives more replayablity. Also gives you a new weapon to play with, the sentinal beam.

The plot or storyline may seem simple, but when you dig deeper and deeper, it gets alot more complexed. Lots of still unanswered questions thou, like who are the reclaimers? are they human? or what dose the Forerunner look like?

The short film/clip on the mappack disk is called "The Day At The Beach". Great presentation, would like to watch it again. Funny to see them use the BR/PP combo.

Gameplay, is simple and easy to get into. Xbox live is what you should be playing on, its like the main reason to be playing Halo 2. The AI is alot better, they have better desistion making. New game variants as well. Theirs not much depth in game play, just the same basic controls.


[center]Presentation: 9.0/10[/center]
[center]Plot: 9.0/10[/center]
[center]Gameplay: 8/10[/center]
[center]Audio: 10/10[/center]

[center]Overall:9.5/10[/center]

Buy?Rent? or Pass?
Its a buy!, get the Special edtion if your a big fan!

[center]Steam Games:[/center]


[center]Half Life 2 with Lost Coast[/center]
[center]Sytem: Xbox and PC[/center]
[center]Genre: FPS[/center]
[center]Player: 1[/center]

Graphics looks great when on max video options and HDR lighting. The audio is great. Always keeping you in suspense. The desgin and inginuiity is interesting. Fun little things to play with around the game to keep replayability up.

Storyline picks up after HL1 ends. Lost Coast, is a mission removed form the original game. It will keep you guessing untill you reach the end. Theirs still unanswered questions.

The gameplay is interesting, even more fun with Gary's Mod, the gravity gun lets you pick up things that arn't mounted on the floor and you get to throw them at enemies or to use to sovle puzzles. The AI is okay, they won't really take cover behind things. The gameplay is simple to get into as well.


[center]Presentation: 9.0/10[/center]
[center]Plot: 8/10[/center]
[center]Gameplay: 9/10[/center]
[center]Audio: 10/10[/center]

[center]Overall:9/10[/center]

Buy? Rent? or Pass?
Its a buy! YAY!

[center]Counter Strike Source[/center]
[center]Sytem: PC[/center]
[center]Genre: FPS[/center]
[center]Player: 1-how much the server can hold without going really laggy[/center]

Graphics, it uses the HL2 engine and HDR lighting. The destruction of windows are more accruate then one shot it compeltly shatters. The music is much but sound effects theirs alot, some are accruate. It has alot of replayablity to give to try different strategies, with different weapons. It may not be really real but its good enough to have fun over and over agian.

Theirs not much of a storyline but CT VS T.

There's bots which you can change their difficulty. Their AI are kinda linear, its some times always the same. Unique weapons to choose from, easy to play controls.


[center]Presentation: 8.0/10[/center]
[center]Plot: 1.0/10[/center]
[center]Gameplay: 8/10[/center]
[center]Audio: 8/10[/center]

[center]Overall:7.5/10[/center]

Buy? Rent? or Pass?
This is a buy! YAY!

[center]Rachet: Deadlocked

System: Playstation 2
Genre: Shoot em Up/Third Person Shooter
Players: 1-2 Offline 1-8 Online[/center]

Rachet: Deadlocked is the 4th installment to the series of Rachet and Clank. If your a fan of the series you'll know that it's famous for it's cartoon loking presentation, great platformering, and of course, blowing up everything in sight. Although Rachet: Deadlocked lacks the word Clank in it's title, Clank is still present in the game, he just doesn't come along on Rachet's back anymore. The presentation of the game is better then ever. Like with each new installment, explosions look better, character models are better, and lip sync is much more in tune. But that's basically all that returns from previous games, if your looking for another RC: UYA you won't find it here.

The story is basically what changed the entire mood of the game. Instead of being something silly like lifeforms turning into robots because of a Dr. Naferious and Lawerence the funny help bot, the story now takes a much more serious concept. Rachet is captured and is forced to play in Illegal Deathmatch tournments, he has to fight his way out for freedom. Although from the box art you can see everything looks more serious, the game still has comedic appeal from the annoucers during the game. However the annoucers repeat themselves too often, and the game itself is way too short. You'll pass by this game anywhere from 5-15 hours. Although there are different difficulites, it's nothing to write home about.

How you play the game is basically the same, only cutting out the more fun parts of previous games. The most platformering you'll do here is jumping from one platform to the next using a hookshot sort of gadget, that's about it. Grind rails are rarely used, and all the platformering off of interesting places like volcanoes or something is absent in this game. There are less weapons as well, only 10 now, you'll only use 4 your first time around, and you'll pick up the other 6 your next two times playing the game and realized they're all useless except the oringal four you had. There's supposibly "Mods" which leave "Huge amount of possiblies" which is false. The mods don't go anywhere pass making the machine gun act like the sheep-ray and having a rocket launcher have little bombs on them. It's nothing new or innovating, and doesn't change the game at all. It's a dissappointment.

For RC fans, you might like this game, I thought it was decent but everything could've been much longer, and much more improved, the weapon mods were made in 2 days because they simply ran out of ideas. I won't suspect another Rachet game, but this doesn't mean this one was terrible, just that it could've been a lot better.

Sound: 8.0 (Everything sounds great, it's just that these great things get repeated over and over again)
Presentation: 9.5 (The style gets old, and not all models match exactly)
Value: 6.0 (Good for a few weeks, if your lucky)
Gameplay: 8.6 (Due to loss of Platformering and better boss fights, the gameplay gets boring)
Result: 8.3
Buy Rent or Pass: Rent, unless your a hardcore RC fan.
________________
I review tons of games on Gamespot all the time. I like the Buy Rent or Pass idea, we should have that. Also if it's not too much trouble Rev you could link at first post all the games reviewed, on that note try Editing your post a bunch of times instead of making 10 posts. Like me
________________
[center]Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas

System: Playstation 2 Xbox PC
Genre: Third Person Shooter/Sandbox Game
Players: 1-2[/center]

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is the 5th installment to the GTA franchise, however in Rockstar terms, it's just a slice of the trilogy for GTA. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas despite hype is still a great game, there were a lot of rumors of what might be in the game, but either way the final product is nothing to complain about.

To start with the bad the graphics of SA are... well, bad. If you think these graphics will change what you think of GTA, they won't. If you own the Ps2 version and have a small TV, you'll be seeing the crapiess graphics out of all possiblies. Howver if you have a 1024x900 resolution moniter and a nice video card then you'll be seeing a decent game. Although chances are you know GTA isn't big on graphical value, and is much more focused on gameplay, side missions, and just the emense size of the game. You'll notice right from starting up the game that the load times are a lot shorter and rockstar got rid of loading screens between traveling to different islands. This is at the price of graphics and loading of some trees which could end up fatal while flying low, but it's for the better.

The plot of the game, is classic GTA. Without spoiling anything, you'll get involved with the FBI, Corrupt Cops, Gangs, Drugs, Casinos, Hicks, Area 69 (Mock up of Area 51) Street Racing, Country Racing, Riots in the City, and even Sucidal Rappers. Someone will be betrayed in GTA, and you will Betray someone. Everything is sort of perdictable, but still fun. Going back to the size of San Andreas to quote rockstar "San Andreas is not a City, it's a state" this is true. Each island is about the size of 2 islands in GTA3 or one island and a half in VC. Although most of this is taken up by Countryside, it still makes the towns larger then life. There's a lot to do in the city, you can ride fares around in a Taxi, help the cops chase down criminals, tag up turf for your gang, collect horseshoes in Las Venturras, Ambulance missions, go around pimping hos, cool down fires in the streets, handle busniess like couriers or even transport drugs or other substances across the country in a truck. There's a lot to do in GTA, I honestly have to say I bought SA on October 30th, and play it almost every day I can play games. If you add that all together that's well around 300 hours of gameplay and still going. You might not play GTA like me, but rest assure it will last you a long time.

The gameplay of GTA, is better then ever. A new manual aiming system is added so the poping tires feature acutally works in your advantage this time around. Along with blowing up gass tanks. Jacking cars has a new brutal feeling, your character will punch the driver in the face, kick them, or bash they're head on the dashboard before throwing the victim in the street as you blaze off with your new car. Also a much needed new jump feature is added, you can now climb over walls which was a much needed feature, it saves you from stacking cars to get over a wall. There are new BMX bikes and country bikes in which you have to tap X rapidly to get some speed which can raise stamina, also new, your character has stats. Stanima, Muscle, Fat, Weapon Skill, Lung Capicty, Flying Skill, Driving Skill, Bike Skill, Cycling Skill, are all added, along with eating to keep your character healthy. You can go to the gym to raise Stamina and Muscle, Fat you can go out and eat, or not eat to raise or decrese it. The other stats are done with practice, if you drive for 3 hours you'll get your skill up, same with flying. Or you can go to a certain school (Ex. Driving School) to get the stats up quicker by doing certain tests like burning out a car's tires or spinning quickly.

However as with all GTA games, glitches come too. There aren't any horrible glitches this time around unless you cheat in the game. Rockstar is known for punishing cheaters one way or another. One of the final missions can not be completed if you cheat 750 times. Also if you spawn too many vehicles your Criminal Rating will go down. If you play the game truly and not cheat, the biggest glitch you'll see is some car get stuck in a telephone pole. It's a great improvement from the horrid Vice City glitches.

Finally, GTA stays true to it's series, adds a lot of much needed features, but if you don't like the series before San Andreas, it won't change your mind.

Sound: 9.9 (This is seriously the best sound track ever, the radio is hilarous and voice actors are mostly fantastic)
Presentation: 6.8 (See "Ugly")
Value: 10 (I've played this game for a Year, and it doesn't even have Online)
Gameplay: 9.7 (There are a few things keeping it from perfection, but none the less, still great)
Result: 9.7
Buy Rent or Pass: Buy You can't rent it anyway since it has the AO rating slapped on it. However a new version is being made.

Hang on guys. As much as I love your reviews, this is NOT the place for them. I only put that example to show you guys how I do it. This thread is here to discuss HOW we want to review games. I'm going to sticky a review thread LATER. With that said:

Stop the reviews.

The reason I put a 3 scale system is simple. Either you LOVED the game to death, thought it was decent or you were disappointed by it. When it comes down to it, these 3 terms describe everything in this world. It's not about how many numbers we have, but what the purpose of using numbers actually is.

I use the term presentation to combine the looks and the sounds of the game. I call it presentation because it's the first thing you see/hear when you boot the game.

As for value, I think you are thinking about replay value. I add this into gameplay. If the game has phenomenal replay value, say in Starcraft, I give it a 3. Gameplay is about having variety and depth, so that it is NOT repetitive.

I don't see the point of having result is. You already have the scores on the look/sound of the game, the plot of the game and the gameplay itself. Why do you need yet another score?

As for buy, rent or pass, the people who read your reviews should be able to decide for themselves. Perhaps they like action games, but you hate them. It wouldn't be fair for you to say pass, when they love that genre.

There's nothing wrong being descritive. I could just have one score:
"This game was really cool, I liked it, it looks cool and stuff
2/2"
But that doesn't really tell me everything, it's good to know what brought the game down and what didn't. If the graphics are awesome but the sound track is a nirvana jam session while two trash cans get bashed together (But wait they're the same thing!! AHAHAH I MADE A FUNNY!!) then it'd be nice if I knew that. Also some people just look at the ratings and not what you said. So adding Value in there and Sound, would be nice. So they wouldn't have to search through 4 paragraphs to see if you said "By the way, the gun noises sound like me constipated taking a dump" or if the reviewer forgets to add that in, the reader will never know . Like games that look awesome, play awesome, and look awesome, but are 20 minutes long. Might want to mention that in the ratings. Basically all i'm saying that detail is good, that's why a 10 scale would be nice cause if I do a 2/3 is it a high 2? Or a low 2? No one knows!! Figure it out. Same with adding on those whooping 3 catigores of Value, Sound and R/B/P.

That's where paragraphs come in. You tell the people all the details here.

As for a final score on the game, it's not accurate because people judge games differently. Someone may find that a games graphics is the most important thing that he considers when buying games. I however, believe gameplay is above all other scores. Therefore, the only score that is important to me is the gameplay.

Say you had a game with 1/3 in both graphics and plot, yet you have a 3/3 in gameplay. That averages to 5/9. However, you could also have a game with 1/3 in plot and gameplay, yet a 3/3 in graphics. Both games are 5/9 if we total them up. However, a person who is interested in graphics would have no idea which game to buy from those scores.

We aren't here to say what's important to look at when buying games. That's the job of the people. We just say what we think of certain areas that people do look at individually. Therefore, people can throw away our opinions on parts of the games they don't care about, say graphics or plot.

Do you understand?

I wasn't arguing on the "Result" catigory though. I see your point in it, but it's not the one I wanted to keep in there. But it's not going to kill someone to have Sound and Value, but I guess the BRP isn't really needed that much either.

I'm not saying my way is the best, but unless you have a good point about changing or removing something, it's good as it is.

I AM open to suggestions, just give me good reasons why.

If you don't like how I clump sounds/graphics/design into one category, I'd like to hear why you think so.

Well like I said it's good to know the ups and downs of a certain part of the game. The graphics could be really awesome and kickass and have horrible sound but if all you mention is "THe graphics are really good but the sound sucked ass" and it gets a 2/3 you won't know if the graphics turned out not to be that great, or if the sound just sucked really badly unless if you read the text. Which could be rather lenghty. And also as I mentioned before for people that only read the ratings given out and not read text or if the the reviewer's language is so illegable that you can't understand it then it'd be nice to add just a tiny more detail. I'm not asking for:
Graphics Department:
Models:
Shading:
Voice Overs:
Sound Effects:
Lighting:
Realism:
Style:
Blah blah blah
I just want to add Sound and Value. Also I could argue that Plot is part of gameplay, so it doesn't need to be added does it? Plot is a big part of the game, but it's the part that you play and not see. I'm surprised you didn't have:
"What You Saw"
"What You Did"
These are very basic and can be more helpful. By breaking them up into more groups, not a lot more just Gameplay (How you play the game Sense: Touch, sort of) Sound (How the game sounds Sense: Hear) Graphics (What you saw Sense: Sight) and instead of smell we have Value and instead of Taste we can add Plot. Graphics, Sound, Value, Gameplay, Plot. Along with adding what the game is rated and what platforms it's for of course.

I think it should be on a rating scale of 1-10, so it can be more exact. 1-2 could be Awful, 3-4 could be bad, 5-6 could be passable, 7-8 could be good, and 9-10 could be ÜBER YOU GOTTA PLAY THIS GAME.

That's quite the jump there.
0-1 Broken
2-3 Horrid
4-5 Bad
6-7 Decent
8-9 Good
10 Perfect

Really, reviews don't help much at all. Everyone has different tastes, so you can't really say which game is better, only in your own point of view. But I suppose it's for fun...and money in most cases!

Oh woops.. delete this post.

Maybe set up a sort of "reviews" database, with a moderator or two? Anyone could submit reviews, moderators could pass them through. I also prefer the scale of 1-10.

I also think the "presentation" ranking is dumb.

Maybe have these various categories?

Graphics
Audio
Plot
Gameplay

Also, as there would be a database, perhaps we could expand upon it. Each "front page" of the reviewed game could have the currently accepted summary of it, and then have a link to a screenshots page (with perhaps a maximum of 5 screenshots) and a thread page, where members can offer input or comment on the review.

The database would have a search bar to search by title name, developer, system(s), genre, and perhaps by score (such as 31-35 and 36-40).

It would prove to be a relatively painless experiment, and it might work so well that we could adopt it to the downloads database as well.

What do you guys think about that?

Not every game has a plot, or one worth talking about (Counter Strike, Battlefield, Sport Games) however they all have a Value meter and how long you can play them so Value > Plot

You do know this is staredit.net right? And not ign.com or gamespot.com?

And there are more things to do here than map.

You do know that SC is impressively ancient right?

Besides, I was figuring this little experiment might be adapted to the DLDB, but it's beyond me to make such connections.

Whether it's old or not do you not think it's really werid how it would be renamed:
"Starcraft mapping AND REVIEWING GAMES HUR HUR website" ?
Gamespot, dedicated to games, along with all other game sites. Not like they'll have "Welcome to the offical Axe site, here's our list of reviews"

Sure, or you could look at possibly modifying this for use in the DLDB, as I suggested. One idea could spawn another.

And please stop mocking me. I'd hate for there to be ill blood between us. You may disagree with what I believe, but we can be civil about this.

The HUR HUR HUR was to stress the point of how out of place it would be. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, i'm saying that I doubt Yoshi or IP will ever agree to it.

Yoshi magically came back?

Besides, with the right presentation, we might be able to squeeze something out of IP.

Brutetal, AI on Halo 2 is very easy, Halo 1 AI is 20x better.

Are you sure you don't mean the STATS of enemy bots get 20x better? Do you actually see them making smarter decisions like flanking or covering each other?