tomchick's Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception review

Because Jason hates that word.

Anyway, everyone loling at HG's supposed "dishonesty" is completely misunderstanding the meaning of the word "honest" when it comes to reviews. Just because a review we host hols a minority opinion doesn't mean we posted it to draw in hits or stir the pot or anything else. It's just one person's opinion, for one thing. Had it been someone else who liked the game, we would have posted that review as well. And not heard any of this senseless bitching. Also, showing the 'downside' to a mainstream game in this manner adds variety to the internet and gives people a chance to get the FULL PICTURE of what a game has to offer. If these things aren't honesty, then I don't know what is.

But I do know that honesty isn't cooing to the masses and spouting happy crap every time something new and exciting comes along just to please everybody who notices. Frankly, I'm often of the opinion that the majority of 9/10 reviews for big-name games on other sites are spawned out of fear of disturbing this brainless mob of senseless people, as well as fear of alienating the publishers that sponsor them.

Of course, I don't even know why I'm arguing in this fashion. It's not like these people have the kind of intelligence to understand these points or anything we've discussed here. Or that they'll even care.

^ .. for example, that's the kind of honesty that got me fired a few times :D

But you're right. Even if you disagree with the review, it describes well why his opinion is what it is, and what it's based on. Not a controversy, just a good review.

You do things in life to be cool,,,and even if anyone on your site would back you up...You can't be the only person of all review to give such a low score.., That means you are the only cool person who would have integrity and spitting on everyone around you...Enjoy your fame and the fact that some people talk about you but if the owner of the site or anyone in your mod...have any sense of marketing or you want to continue to exist...well you know what you have to do. Marketing stunts is a great thing but for a gaming site called honest gamers and doing in sensationalism as your doing...Well that will be the end of your site

Honest Gamers RIP 11/02/2011 cause of decease Tomchicks

Oh yes enjoy the hits while it last :-) and also,,,any review you will do in the future from this site will be regarded as a joke,,,,it's sad as you have build up quite well in the past:-)

I love how he's speaking as though an expert, but thinks that one review is going to end this place. He's apparently not aware of all the other catastrophic, stupid shit that goes on around here. I do. I'm the cause of 95% of it. 99%. Sorry.

And a negative review of an obviously over-hyped game isn't going to taint his integrity--at least not on here. Again, you have to do something far worse.

I'm just curious: Of all these outcries, how many people do you think have actually played the game and how many are so loyal to the series they automatically defend it--even without any sort of evidence he's wrong?

To this day, I still can't tolerate trolls who besmirch the fine name of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. The entire world knows that was a classic piece of film-making. After all, The Wrath of Khan was great! How could the third be anything less?

//Zig

That's a different case, Zig. The Rule of Even-Numbered Trek Films is a demonstrable phenomenon - or at least it was until 10(Nemesis) sucked and 11(the reboot) broke the cycle.

The Search for Spock wasn't bad, but it was bookended by The Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home, which were much better films. Ditto with The Final Frontier and Generations. The odd-numbered ones just aren't as good.

Not giving an Uncharted game a 10/10 is a way to lose all credibility.

Leslie:
That's pretty much why I stopped commenting on Facebook. It's gotten to the point that people are subtly conceding the rational points while still standing on their rage-induced irrational ones. I've also noticed most critics siding with Tom, and rightly so.

"I'm just curious: Of all these outcries, how many people do you think have actually played the game.."

A much worse question is what this means about who read reviews. We kind of hope it isn't just... extremely engaged gamers, right?

Read more like a rant then a review, the only thing he said about the gameplay was that the shooting was great the rest was just a rant on how the gameplay didn't perfectly match up with the story (you know like in every other video game too...). So yeah a review that doesn't even talk in detail about the gameplay and spends several paragraphs bitching about the story is worthless.

That could also be a sign that the game spends too much time on the story, and not enough time on interaction or strong game mechanics.

//Zig

Protip for winning internet arguments:

Read just enough of the thing you want to attack to remember a couple of words or points that they used. Then disregard the remainder of the work and attack what you think he was saying in the bits you disregarded.

Harrison Ford disagrees.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/tI3tsWus2KQ

Zig, it's far more likely it's just a bad review. He's just ranting about the story not reviewing the game.

Jerk stole my avatar!

At first I thought that was you being facetious.

EDIT:
If you disagree so much, doomed soul, there's nothing stopping you from submitting a review yourself.

Zig, it's far more likely it's just a bad review. He's just ranting about the story not reviewing the game.

He's ranting about how poorly the story and gameplay intertwine. It's a perfectly relevant complaint when the big draw of the Uncharted series is its theatricality.

..by the way - what's going on with the entire "my opinion is sound, because I use my real name when I write crazy things on the internet" thing going on in the facebook comments..?

Just people grasping for insults rather than agreeing to disagree.

..sounds like a monster family reunion. Fifteen branches of spawn from someone no one knows, so everyone has a nametag. You randomly bump into people, and they say things like: "Hi, my name is Griselda Zorknot. And I have to say, I violently disagree with your choice in drinks! It makes you, in fact, a terrible human being! Goodbye!".

And then you move on to the next one.

wolfqueen001 changed it

JoeTheDestroyer Except for it not being out it yet. Also since it's not out yet I'm not claiming the conclusion is wrong (since I can't know though I very much doubt it is right) it's just the review seemed to ignore the majority of the gameplay elements in favor of bitching about the story for paragraphs.

Suskie I didn't say it wasn't a relevant complaint, I said he spent the whole review bitching about it and ignoring gameplay aspects which are far more important (especially since almost every single game has issues with story and gameplay intertwining).

People are starving in Africa. Just saying.

Why is him complaining about the story irrelevant? The story is the main aspect of the game. Dude it totally justified in complaining about the story.

I don't agree with his complaints, I feel the story meshes well with the gameplay an is a logical progression for the game. I don't agree with his complaints about it being linear/straightforward, but that's a different argument.

The facebook comments are hilarious. A review is a subjective article. That's it's entire point.

Go to Metacritic or a similar site. Reviews for movies are all over the place - BECAUSE THEY ARE SOMEONE'S OPINION. Reviews for television shows vary constantly too, as do music reviews. It's only in Game reviews where for some reasons fans want everyone's reviews to match. I don't even know why people even make claims that game reviewers are paid off by publishers, since those same people seem to always suggest that AAA titles "deserve" a 90+ Metacritic rating anyways and take a hissy fit if they don't.

Maybe to make it easier on Tom Chick, everybody should send what score he gives games ahead of time so he knows how much he's "supposed" to like it.