Death Smiles: Countdown to North America Invasion

[jonny5]

If anyone here is interested in reading the review and hasn't already, I'd prefer you read the version at my blog.

Great review, a fun read.

+1.....your writing is very energetic....

[Zigfried the Trizealot]

You ended up linking an image of the hardest attack in the game, Jitterbug's final attack, available in Mega Black Label only, which is DLC. This is meant to entice newcomers how? Moreover, wasn't even available when you wrote that review.

I personally screen-capped that image before posting the review. It's not from Mega Black Label.

You say the review was inaccurate, but the only "inaccuracy" that you cited (as opposed to "omission", to which I freely admit) was your error. The rest of your post tells me that, had you been charged with the task, you would have written a different review (were you the type to write such things). That's natural, considering you and I are two different people with different experiences, different tastes, and different perceptions. If I were reading a review, for any genre, I would be bored by intricate explanations of each character and her familiar; such things are better appreciated through play than through text. You clearly look for that level of detail in a review. I can't force you to enjoy my writing. There's nothing more to discuss here.

The reason why you just gave us two responses is because you didn't know how to respond properly, just like how you don't know how to review properly.

I don't know you. I felt insulted, but that was my backhanded effort to allow for the possibility that you were not intentionally being a dick. So you are correct -- at that moment, I did not know how to respond. In the future, I'll remember your name.

[Zigfried the Trizealot]

I, for one, enjoyed your review. I think you did a good job with your explanations of appealing to more seasoned players while not alienating people unfamiliar with the genre. It's obvious that you enjoyed the game and your review reflects that.

Thanks! And thanks to anyone else who posted kind words. I'm just glad the game is actually coming to the US so that my non-importing friends can play it.

[meancode]

Hey all,

Tuesday at 9.30 PM (EST) we will be interviewing Cherie Baker, and we can't wait. Some of the questions we have lined up we took from this thread (well, before it became The Bitchfest Thread) so be sure and listen live. You can also join the chat as we will take some questions there, too.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/gaming/201 ... layer-chat

[gs68]

The issue I'm seeing here is that you haven't played the game enough. You mentioned in your review that Rosa has big breasts yet nothing of how her option works or how the character operates.

Reminds me of how Western media outlets like to describe Otomedius as "that game where you use the touchscreen to rub the character's boobs."

[Jockel]

We had our fair share of bad experiences with reviewers on this page,
icycalm and stuart campbell being the prime examples.
Now here comes a guy that isn't a complete asshole for a change,
yet he still gets flamed?

[roker]

I'd like to reiterate a few things:

-I'm glad this game is coming out here.
-I could give two shits about the story, but the bad translation might actually make me read through it once.
-I don't care about reviews, I depend on forum members and friends to hear their opinions on shmups, THEN I make a leap of faith or educated guess if it's something I'd enjoy.

Is this typical of every prospective buyer? No. This game appeals to a certain type of game player.

Some people here get into this whole "will it sell?" "will people understand it?" "will the mainstream press accept it?" etc. etc. etc. That's fine. There's always going to be people who care about that stuff and it has it's place on this forum I suppose. If there's one thing I've learned, bring on the games and I could care less about the rest of the world. I'm really all about self-fulfillment.

[ncp]

Shmups forum cycle is something like:
[snip]

I laughed. But personally I'd add two lines.

Game reviewed → Game gets imperfect score → "Stupid reviewers don't know anything about shmups, this game is a fuckin' perfect masterpiece."
Game reviewed → Game gets perfect score → "You're so biased toward your favorite genre, you terrible reviewer."

[dan76]

@Zigfried the Trizealot - I liked the review, I guess it didn't go into massive detail but it was more thorough than the few others I've read - a good opener, giving a feel for the game. Intelligently written - reviews like this can't be a bad thing.

Surely you've read some of the posts by a certain member of this forum to know that he is a candidate for douche number two... Best just to ignore dumb replies.

[Warp_Rattler]

I thought the review hit a nice middle-ground: you had enough points of reference to establish your familiarity with the genre and speak to its fans, but you didn't drown the whole thing in jargon and inside lingo that would potentially alienate complete newcomers (and last I checked, the genre wasn't an insiders' club, so that's a good thing). I'm not sure if I completely agree with the 10/10--it's an excellent game, but perfect is a pretty hefty call to make. But that's just my take, and I'm not really a fan of numbers-based reviews anyways. I prefer to let a well-written review speak of whether or not I'd find the game enjoyable rather than just have the writer throw numbers at me and expect me to choose just how much I like 7s or 8s. You obviously put some effort into it and made an accessible and engaging piece, so good work.

[Elixir]

If I were reading a review, for any genre, I would be bored by intricate explanations of each character and her familiar; such things are better appreciated through play than through text. You clearly look for that level of detail in a review.

If you think telling people how a character plays is too "intricate" for people to understand, you're wrong. So you admit that you're unable to tell your audience how the game plays. That's the whole point of a review, though.

The fact is that you reviewed the game a week after getting it (possibly less, since you don't live in Japan) and instead of giving people an idea of the experience, you told them what the game is. How do I score? What other modes are available? I don't know why you didn't bother.

[Rob]

How do I score? What other modes are available? I don't know why you didn't bother.

Cave scoring systems are no good and not worth mentioning. I'm going to play it for the boss graphics, too.

[njiska]

If I were reading a review, for any genre, I would be bored by intricate explanations of each character and her familiar; such things are better appreciated through play than through text. You clearly look for that level of detail in a review.

If you think telling people how a character plays is too "intricate" for people to understand, you're wrong. So you admit that you're unable to tell your audience how the game plays. That's the whole point of a review, though.

The fact is that you reviewed the game a week after getting it (possibly less, since you don't live in Japan) and instead of giving people an idea of the experience, you told them what the game is. How do I score? What other modes are available? I don't know why you didn't bother.

It's all about striking a balance. As I learned trying to review Mushi Futari 1.5, if you try to go into too much detail you'll quickly end up with a long and borring piece of writing. However those are also elements that should not be ignored. The key is to give a high level over view that gives the reader an idea of how scoring works and characters vary, without being precise.

One also needs to keep their audience in mind. The average gamer isn't going to care about 90% of the crap members of this forum care about. Just look at Rob's commentary on Gamespot's Ikaruga review for proof of that.

[StarCreator]

If you think telling people how a character plays is too "intricate" for people to understand, you're wrong. So you admit that you're unable to tell your audience how the game plays. That's the whole point of a review, though.

Um, I think you confused "review" and "strategy guide". As far as I know, reviews exist only to convey the author's opinion of a product.

[Daigoro]

If anyone here is interested in reading the review and hasn't already, I'd prefer you read the version at my blog. Thanks to the magic of hindsight, that version's better-edited, better organized, and less pandering (it assumes a bit more knowledge and intelligence on the part of readers). I still give the game a well-deserved top rating -- seven Hokuto stars out of seven Hokuto stars!

nice review. +1000 pts for mentioning Section Z (one of my all time faves).

[lgb]

Too tired to mass quote Elixir posts and lines this morning.

The localization is fine but some fan-organized translation compendium would be nice. There's just one problem.

[charlie chong]

Welcome to Shmups Forum, where people are either retarded or a dick or a retarded dick. Pick your poison.

RETARDEDED PLS K THX BI

[Elixir]

It's all about striking a balance. As I learned trying to review Mushi Futari 1.5, if you try to go into too much detail you'll quickly end up with a long and borring piece of writing. However those are also elements that should not be ignored. The key is to give a high level over view that gives the reader an idea of how scoring works and characters vary, without being precise.

One also needs to keep their audience in mind. The average gamer isn't going to care about 90% of the crap members of this forum care about. Just look at Rob's commentary on Gamespot's Ikaruga review for proof of that.

You'll only make a long and boring piece if you're a bad writer, or lack a backspace key. Fundamental scoring aspects are one of the main things a shmup has going for it to begin with, and oftentimes are make or break for some (people hate chaining, love absorbing, etc) so if your audience gets bored with the review, then they're a) not really interested in the game or b) in the wrong genre.

Point is, even if you're going to keep it brief and flower it with light humour, at least get your facts straight. Things like "Follett is weak" and a lack of description on how characters operates is like reviewing an RPG without mentioning the cast. I'm not expecting every small detail to be addressed, but the way the game plays isn't exactly what I'd call a "small detail" at all.

Um, I think you confused "review" and "strategy guide".

Nope.

[njiska]

You'll only make a long and boring piece if you're a bad writer, or lack a backspace key. Fundamental scoring aspects are one of the main things a shmup has going for it to begin with, and oftentimes are make or break for some (people hate chaining, love absorbing, etc) so if your audience gets bored with the review, then they're a) not really interested in the game or b) in the wrong genre.

Or you have it backwards. You always write for your audience, not the other way around. If I was writing a review for here I'd go nuts with the mechanics because it's exactly what you guy want. But, if on the other hand, I was writing for a mainstream publication I'd place the focus more on controls and feel. Maybe talk about the art and music. Yes i'd briefly touch on scoring, but it's just not as important to that audience.

It's the same thing as discussions that break out on this board about playing for survival or playing for score. The survivalists just want to known about control and difficulty and the score players want to know the finer points of getting points. Neither is wrong, they just have different interests and different expectations.

Remember the golden rule:
YOU CAN'T PLEASE EVERYONE

Point is, even if you're going to keep it brief and flower it with light humour, at least get your facts straight. Things like "Follett is weak" and a lack of description on how characters operates is like reviewing an RPG without mentioning the cast. I'm not expecting every small detail to be addressed, but the way the game plays isn't exactly what I'd call a "small detail" at all.

I won't argue with getting your facts straight. That should always be true. And yes, I would expect more than Follet is weak. But I wouldn't expect a full fledged comparision of each girl's attributes.

[brentsg]

Remember the golden rule:
YOU CAN'T PLEASE ELIXIR.

Fixed.

[Aquas]

T-minus one week to release. Wheeeeee.

[E. Randy Dupre]

Or you have it backwards. You always write for your audience, not the other way around.

Worth quoting, because it's the most intelligent thing that's been said in this thread, possibly ever. And it's not even about the fucking game.

[Zigfried the Trizealot]

Point is, even if you're going to keep it brief and flower it with light humour, at least get your facts straight. Things like "Follett is weak" and a lack of description on how characters operates is like reviewing an RPG without mentioning the cast. I'm not expecting every small detail to be addressed, but the way the game plays isn't exactly what I'd call a "small detail" at all.

I didn't say she was weak (that would be ridiculous), and I did describe the basics behind how the game plays. Contrary to your previous post, I do not think character descriptions are too intricate for people to understand -- and I never said such a thing. I think those intricacies would be too boring to describe in words. There is such a thing as overkill; if writers describe everything that they think is cool about a game, then their words often have the opposite effect on readers. It's simply too deep -- people will be more open to that level of detail after they've played the game. In other words, gameplay description (at the character-by-character level) would fit better in a strategy guide.

If someone tried to walk me through every character's style in a review -- and this includes a cast description for RPGs -- I would skip to the conclusion. I refuse to intentionally write a review that would bore me. I'm also a believer in whetting peoples' interest so that they can discover the rest for themselves.

Since you've goaded me into replying again, I may as well point out that I did not review the game a week after it was released. You've said that twice, but repeating it won't make it true. Check your own facts before telling others to check theirs.

I understand that you did not like my review, but please stop making things up.

[Elixir]

I didn't say she was weak (that would be ridiculous), and I did describe the basics behind how the game plays.

I meant to say that you said Follett was slow, which is wrong.

Contrary to your previous post, I do not think character descriptions are too intricate for people to understand -- and I never said such a thing.

If I were reading a review, for any genre, I would be bored by intricate explanations of each character and her familiar

It's simply too deep -- people will be more open to that level of detail after they've played the game. In other words, gameplay description (at the character-by-character level) would fit better in a strategy guide.

Good god, man. How can you give a game a 10/10 without explaining fundamental gameplay aspects? You find it boring because you think that gameplay aspects aren't important enough to review. It's your review and your bloated opinion, yet you're not explaining why the game deserves a 10/10.

Explaining how the characters work, how the scoring system works, and the various arrange modes is not something best saved for a strategy guide. It isn't "boring" or "too deep", especially if you're giving the game a perfect score. What you are essentially doing is speaking for your audience in saying "I don't find the scoring systems interesting enough to talk about, therefore nobody else does."

Since you've goaded me into replying again, I may as well point out that I did not review the game a week after it was released. You've said that twice, but repeating it won't make it true. Check your own facts before telling others to check theirs.

I understand that you did not like my review, but please stop making things up.

It's not that I disliked your review, it's that you gave it a perfect score without having enough reason to do so.

And I did check my facts. You "personally screen-capped that image before posting the review", a screencap with wallpaper borders in HD only present in the 360 version. If you had experience with the arcade version itself, you wouldn't have skipped things like key scoring aspects, and you wouldn't have waited a week after release to post a review of the game.

[StarCreator]

And I did check my facts. You "personally screen-capped that image before posting the review", a screencap with wallpaper borders in HD only present in the 360 version.

I fail to understand how the screenshot being from the 360 version precludes him from having taken the screenshot for a review of the 360 version of the game.

[E. Randy Dupre]

.. and on and on and on and on and on and on and on...

These 'last word' competitions that you like engaging in so much, Elixir? Even when it's blatantly obvious that nobody else agrees with you or gives even half a shit?

*Really* fucking tiresome now.

[Warp_Rattler]

Is it Midol time yet?

[Elixir]

.. and on and on and on and on and on and on and on...

These 'last word' competitions that you like engaging in so much, Elixir? Even when it's blatantly obvious that nobody else agrees with you or gives even half a shit?

*Really* fucking tiresome now.

So if everyone likes the review, so should I? There's enough sheep here already. There's also a ton of people who don't extensively play games before reviewing them. And since you're so good at speaking for the majority, you could probably become a reviewer there.

[Rob]

So if everyone likes the review, so should I?

Yes. I trust Zigfried's opinion since he is an expert and a champion. Fully expecting a 10/10 next Tuesday.

[Aru-san]

So if everyone likes the review, so should I?

Yes. I trust Zigfried's opinion since he is an expert and a champion. Fully expecting a 10/10 next Tuesday.

If before Elixir comes back with some more pissy remarks we all couldn't care less about.