Erik has gone to Cuba for the week. Once he found out that a normal Cuban greeting consisted of having your tongue bitten and your penis length checked, he booked the first plane out of Toronto. Why do I mention this? We have one hard rule at OMM. If Paul Steed says something, anything - it is erik's job to comment on it. I might write something that contains a Paul Steed quote or mention, but trust me, erik was dictating that part of my piece to me in an annoying high pitched voice he gets when discussing Paul. This is my first, on my own, rant on Steed. You should probably read Stead's Steed's Thinking Outside the Box> before reading the rest.
Everything uttered or written by man is subjective.
Mr. Steed, while you are at a bar drinking your Sea Breezes a woman might walk by with Double DD breasts and you would say, "Damn, those are big breasts." But are they? Are you being objective? Or are they just big to you? What if you were sitting next to the editor of PCXL? He spends his whole day staring at breasts and trying to figure how to work them into a review. Those breasts are nothing to that man.
Are reviewers only not being objective if they say something bad about Q3? While talking about sites that are not objective, Paul can't or will not name sites in his little piece. But I will. When Daily Radar had all their editors comment on Q3 Vs UT, Q3 won. Okay, no problem they are both good games... but... when judging connectivity what does one of the editor-in-chiefs Frank O'Connor say? Was he objective?
On Q3: Point, click, kill. Few lag problems and I expect it to improve.
On UT: Unreal had some lag issues and wasn't even great on a LAN.
Hey Frank, we are talking about UT not Unreal. Is this the kind of objectivity you wanted Steed?? The man is so objective he didn't even bother playing UT before declaring Q3 the winner. On every point he talks about Q3, if it failed or succeeded. He never even pretends to have played Unreal Tournament. Paul, with Q3, you guys were Def Leppard stepping out onto the stage in front of a bunch of head banging amputee teenagers. You had the crowd on your side before the first note.
Do you want objectivity??? You can't have it. Your company has been one of the nicest companies to us, our logo is in Q3, I often wear one of my many Q3 Ts to work, but when I sit down to play a FPS online, I choose Unreal Tournament. I like it better because (here is the subjective part) I never play straight deathmatch online with strangers. Never. If we are in the office and someone wants me to crush them in DM, I choose Q3. Every time, never UT. What game should people buy? What would be the objective answer?? Would, "Depends" work? or "Do you have $100 to spend on games this month?"
Reviews of games should be harsh. A simple, should you buy it or not. This is no $7.00 movie. And games are more objectively reviewed than most forms of entertainment. I can give you facts about the game, number of levels, frame rate and system it will run on. What can I say about a movie? The print I viewed had no scratches? This book sucked but the binding was nice?
Reviewers aren't normal people? Would you be anything but bitter after playing most of the games out there? 95% of the games are crap. Worse than that, most game companies act like they could care less for the people who do buy games. In the name of copy protection it takes 3 minutes and 15 seconds to load Age Of Empires II. This is from clicking on the icon until the first clickable screen (the ms intro which you can skip). If I go to a certain site and run a crack I can load the same game right into the menu in less than 5 seconds. Is that being nice to the average consumer?? Reviewers don't tend to mention this, but I will here. That sucks. You can no longer just jump into a game and play it for a few minutes. You have to find the CD, wait for the copy protection and 5 minutes later you can play. Is that friendly to those 91% of the dumb gamers out there? When I was on the last level of Urban Chaos, it actually took me longer to load the game then it did for me to try and beat the last level a couple of times.
When a game sucks, reviewers have to keep playing. If I am reviewing a bad movie and a boring scene come on the screen I can close my eyes and let Patrick Swayze carry on about how he has a degree in philosophy and is a black belt. In a game, I have to keep watching, keep playing. I have to actually be the gentle but rugged Swayze. Do you want bitter? Do you want disgust??? Try playing Ultima IX without any patches. The game was rushed for Christmas. The problem? According to Ultima IX programmer Capnbill; "DirectX is hard." Oh sorry. Should I not only pay $50 for the game, but also throw in $10 so you can buy a book on DirectX?
You should sit quiet on this Steed. You guys got good, fair reviews. Sure you didn't get straight A+'s but your whining is starting to sound like some high school girl whining that she only got a 98% on her test while I stare at my 73%.
Erik's new home?
Paul if you start getting mad, just look at Kelly. See Paul we have something in common. You can calm down looking at pictures of Kelly, I can calm down looking at pictures of bunnies.
This magazine covers what industry?
I paid $30 just to load Wizard Of Wor faster. What is it going to cost me today?