Google+   Facebook button  Twitter button 
3DS | DS | PS3 | PS4 | PSP | VITA | WII | WIIU | X360 | XB1 | All

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (Game Boy Color) artwork

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (Game Boy Color) review


"STORY (8/10): The gang is getting ready for the Multicultural festival at UC Sunnydale. At first, it seems harmless, but then an evil plot begins to unravel... "



STORY (8/10): The gang is getting ready for the Multicultural festival at UC Sunnydale. At first, it seems harmless, but then an evil plot begins to unravel...

GRAPHICS (12/15): The graphics aren't exactly fabulous, but they're pretty good considering the fact that they are on a Game Boy Color. There are subtle differences in the appearance of all of the different types of vampires.

SOUND (6/10): It's a bit repetetive and annoying, but it's a Game Boy game. What else did you expect?

GAMEPLAY (33/50): It's basically the same thing over and over again. Some of hte vamps are harder than others, but overall it's fairly simple, and it's boring by the end.

REPLAYABILITY (4/10): Sometimes if I'm really bored, I'll pull out this game, but then I realize that I picked up Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so I laugh, put it back in its case, and resume playing a more worthy game.

DIFFICULTY (2/5): I beat this in about 4 1/2 hours. Enough said.

OVERALL (65/100): Overall, don't buy this. Rent it if you want, but for the love of Goddess, don't waste your money on this. It's really only fun if you're a fan of the show.

Rating: 6.5/10

caitlin's avatar
Community review by caitlin (November 20, 2002)

A bio for this contributor is currently unavailable, but check back soon to see if that changes. If you are the author of this review, you can update your bio from the Settings page.

Feedback

If you enjoyed this Buffy the Vampire Slayer review, you're encouraged to discuss it with the author and with other members of the site's community. If you don't already have an HonestGamers account, you can sign up for one in a snap. Thank you for reading!

board icon
zippdementia posted May 13, 2010:

Should this review even be on the site? I don't mean to sound callous or overly critical, but I think we've improved our image since those early days. It may be time to start getting rid of some of this kind of stuff that isn't even a review but just a set of scores with one sentence explanations.

I'm not trying to decree that we set a precedent for what constitutes a review, but I'm pretty sure if this exact review was submitted to the site today it would be turned down. Am I wrong?
board icon
WilltheGreat posted May 13, 2010:

Well we axed fanfiction to improve the site's image. I say to be consistent, we have to start purging old reviews like this one.

Of course I also said we should axe reviews of NSFW material and that was quietly dismissed, so this could go either way.
board icon
honestgamer posted May 13, 2010:

Reviews should be on the site--or not--based on the standards that were in effect at the time that said reviews were submitted. This review was approved and has been on the site for years, so it stays.
board icon
Nightmare posted May 13, 2010:

No offense, but that just seems silly.

Does a sculptor leave behind bits of clay that don't fit, simply because they were there originally when they started the endeavor? Does a writer keep every sentence/paragraph/chapter they've written when shaping a novel, because it was placed there initially?

No.

Now, granted, it may be wrong to remove someone's work without his or her consent, but the argument can be made that such things flaw the integrity of your site, and that you have to do what's necessary in order for it to be regarded as competitive.
board icon
pickhut posted May 13, 2010:

Well, I can understand if the date said "Date Unavailable", but it's 2002, and readers can easily compare a review from that time period to that of 2010, seeing how far the standards have come and how much the site has grown since.

Also, it would be like a slap to the face to contributors that supported the site during its early years if it were deleted.
board icon
honestgamer posted May 13, 2010:

You make a fair point, Nightmare, so let me just address it by saying that there are a number of ways to be competitive. Most of those ways have attracted so many competitors (gaming sites are a dime a dozen, you might say, and already there are plenty of review factories that post tons of user reviews without any sort of personal touch) that we're left with what was always one of the best options: make sure that our writers feel that their work is valued.

My desire to leave old content on the site goes hand in hand with that. Even though they're not around right now, I believe that the people who wrote reviews such as this one deserve to know that there's a record of their effort on this site and that they don't have to worry about us working so hard to rush forward that we forget where we came from and forget the people who made it possible for us to get here.

Honestly, I don't see it as a huge deal anyway because the overwhelming majority of reviews posted on the site were and are excellent. The odds against someone coming across this one review and thinking poorly of the site because of it would have to be astronomical by this point.
board icon
Nightmare posted May 13, 2010:

In truth, you're probably right. I imagine there are few people who seek a review for something on the Game Boy Color, and even less who want to know how well Buffy plays. It's only gathered 466 reviews since it's been up, and that was roughly eight years ago.

And I respect your decision to keep every review up, or not abuse your authority and delete all things you see as a negative reflection of the site. It's unethical. I suppose one could argue that you've removed the Fan Fiction, but I know that was more to save everyone from possible copyright infringement than it was a vulgar display of power.

But I can also see where others are coming from, who may wonder if this tarnishes their hard work and if it would ultimately steer away potential interest in the site.

Though none would feel a greater impact than you would, so if you're not concerned with it then I suppose the rest should not be either.
board icon
zippdementia posted May 14, 2010:

Just to be clear, I was only making a suggestion. I put it out there as such and it was turned down as such. It doesn't get much deeper than that for me.

The reason I made the suggestion was because I came across this review from one of the "Read this review!" images that rotate near the top of the HG site. I took HG up on its offer and was met with utter failure. It just made me think about cleaning house a bit.

But it's not my house, so it's not my decision. I am just a guest here, and a fairly happy one, at that. I do like Jason's commitment to keeping the writers here happy. I do doubt that Caitlin is still around to feel unhappy about having his/her Buffy review taken down, but I understand the principle and will, as always, stand by the decision made by Jason.
board icon
bloomer posted May 14, 2010:

You have dissed the entire oeuvre of Caitlin, which consists of this one review :)
board icon
jerec posted May 14, 2010:

That wouldn't even get accepted at GameFAQs. Somehow, I thought that even back in 2002 that HG had higher standards than GF. But I can't remember when exactly I first started posting/submitting here, so maybe I'm misremembering.
board icon
honestgamer posted May 14, 2010:

Quality standards were increased shortly after this review was posted. In 2002, I wasn't particularly active in my recruiting efforts on GameFAQs, and any efforts there went pretty much nowhere because bobotheclown and Masters hadn't yet seen the site and decided to contribute their welcome support, so I had to count on reviews that I could find from pretty much anyone. Most of the site hadn't even been coded, and what was there was really sloppy because I was still learning how to use MySQL and PHP. I was essentially running the site by myself and with no prospects or reason to believe that it had much chance at all of becoming what it is today. Quality control became something that I did more aggressively once more talented writers were willing to participate, around mid-2003.
board icon
jerec posted May 14, 2010:

The earliest review I have posted here is from January 2003 so that might be when I first visited. Jason, the reviewing scene here has lasted longer than the reviewing scene at GameFAQs, and it's been more consistent with its popularity. And HG shows no signs of dying... just seems to be in a lull at the moment. GameFAQs reviewing scene is non-existent these days, except for a few people hanging on, and many of them are here too.

That's something to be very proud of.

You must be signed into an HonestGamers user account to leave feedback on this review.

Info | Help | Privacy Policy | Contact | Advertise | Links

eXTReMe Tracker
© 1998-2014 HonestGamers
None of the material contained within this site may be reproduced in any conceivable fashion without permission from the author(s) of said material. This site is not sponsored or endorsed by Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, or any other such party. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a registered trademark of its copyright holder. This site makes no claim to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, its characters, screenshots, artwork, music, or any intellectual property contained within. Opinions expressed on this site do not necessarily represent the opinion of site staff or sponsors.