Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 16 Jun 2009.
I think Harry should review it, and Joe made to watch over his shoulder... in silence.
In all seriousness though, why don't two people do a write up? Joe and someone who has never touched the series?
It's funny that this question has only come up with Monkey Island: Special Edition. I mean, reviewing games you've already played another version of and know very well has happened many times in the past. You, Joe, for example reviewed Braid PC. Should you have given it to someone else, because you knew what to expect? Mass Effect PC was the same. In those cases, you really were reviewing what the changes to the original were, and to be honest that's all you're going to be doing for M.I. S.E.
So, I say, go ahead and review it if you like, it's hardly being "unjournalistic" if you use your past reviewing policy as a base. However, getting a total M.I. noob to play it would be interesting in the same way getting Faith to play through Fable 2 was. Both are valid for different reasons, so it's really just up to you.
The question is two-fold then; firstly, do you think I can be trusted to review a Monkey Island game fairly?
No. I believe that you'd approach the review with the adoration that you've already expressed for the game, and probably wouldn't come out with a review that truely reflects all the negative points in the game.
However, your (Joe) perspective would be important. Infact, I would suggest that (Like your Team review of the drinks a while back) two of you review it together.
Secondly, who would you like to review this game instead?
Someone who doesn't;
A: Love the game (presumably) unconditonally.
B: Know much about the game.
My gut reaction says Clive and Joe. Separately, so Clive's review doesn't get contaminated by Joes Monkey Island love-excretions.
Though, if Clive's been avoiding Lucas Arts adventure games for this long, there has to be a reason.
How long should a reviewer be stuck for before he uses a walkthrough and, if they only use a walkthrough for a single puzzle, should they still mention it in the review?
However long the reviewers patience holds out.
Mentioning the use of a guide is an absolute must. Not only so that we know you're not the next gaming messiahs, but to prevent 'splashback' if it were to later emerge that a guide was used and it was glossed over - I'd see it casting doubt over the final score and possibly over other game reviews. IMO reviewers walk a tightrope of trust - We readers trust you (almost) with our wallets, bending that by glossing over some facts would probably not end well. At least, not for me.
Actually, Braid was the exception. In the past I've avoided reviewing the same game twice wherever possible - which is why Andy reviewed Mass Effect and Mirror's Edge on consoles first, then I reviewed them on console, with the later PC review being about looking at what is new for the PC release. In the case of Braid, that wasn't a lot - and the review suffered for it IMHO.
I second the idea that it should get two reviews - one from Joe, and one from someone who is unfamiliar with the series.
I think that the biggest problem with Joe reviewing a Monkey Island game is that he fights like a cow when he should be fighting like a dairy farmer.
+ Rep for awesomeness.
How about a review by someone not so... overly familiar with the MI games and an opinion piece or addendum by Joe, at least then we can see if it's as good as the original (from a MI fan perspective ) or if something has gone drastically wrong.
oh, go on then.
I think I'd be almost as biased as Joe but then the writing would be so bad you'd have trouble making sense of what I was trying to say about it.
I think that having two reviewers is a good idea, since the new game comes in two modes you could have Joe review the 'retro' mode to see if it stands up to his expectations and have someone unfamiliar with the series review it in the newer mode. Or vice versa.
You know, I made a little promise to myself when I wrote this blogpost that if anybody responded by saying "Me - I should review it instead of Joe or Clive or Harry" then I'd oblige and send the game out to them.
Unfortunately, nobody did and I've decided not to do it now. Ah well.
Are you sure you don't want to reconsider?
Just write two reviews of course, one for the enlightened, and one for the rest.
Richard "bindibadgi" Swinburne all the way to review Monkey Island!!
It's basically because everyone knows, at the back of their mind, despite what they say/type that there's really no other answer other than to get you to review it. Nobody else would be prepared enough to give it the review it deserves.
I can only say now, with retrospect, that I wish I had said 'me! me! me!'
write it in PHP then
I'm not sure that'd make it easier for us to digest, without learning PHP :B
I don't want to do that, on the off chance the coders on NR start asking me for input :/
What? I can't understand what you just wrote.
I want to review it. Grim Fandango corrupted my save and I never went back, though I was enjoying it until then. Hence I have an equal blend of enthusiasm and scepticism.
Separate names with a comma.