Shmups suck according to mainstream reviewers

[Taylor]

Someone should make a shmup for the next-generation, reimagine the genre for the 21st century and give gamers the surprise hit they never even knew they wanted! It won’t be a game, in fact, rather a pseudo science-fiction battle experience. It’ll have an intricate storyline told through hours of animated cut scenes and deep, searching dialogue. It’s more than just a game plot; it deconstructs the very society and ideals by which we stand. Players will strapped into a rollercoaster ride of emotion over 50 hours long, blasting the physics out of enemies and unlocking extra content such as alternative costumes, big head mode and, for the truly hardcore, a "not so easy" difficulty.



For casual orientated shmups I don’t think the genre is dead, dying or falling awkwardly to the ground. Sure they’re not going to get the attention of GTA or MGS – but they don’t need it either. They don’t need to make 2 million sales in the first week to claw back a profit. Everyday Shooter, Stardust, Geometry Wars, Dark Mist, etc. – lots of people play these, and they are good games even if they do not subscribe to arcade ideals.

Arcade shmups will never be mainstream because of the reasons PROMETHEUS pointed out, they develop around different ideals and for a home player they are all turn-off’s. But, honestly, if they didn’t have the inherent difficulty, stupid final stages and TFB’s I doubt we would enjoy them so much. Can anyone here say they saw the bugged DDP:DF Hibachi safe-spots and didn’t think "Well, I hope it gets fixed, it’s supposed to make grown men cry!" The other thread where people are citing what they like the most popular reasons are skill and difficulty. It’s extremely bad form to make a game in this generation that has joypad twisting agony in it (we’ve all been there), people are content being rewarded with a stream of cut-scenes, collectables and eye-candy.

Though I certainly agree steps can, and should, be taken to reduce this - practice modes, auto-bomb arrange modes, incentive to 1cc and a much easier difficulty curve when playing for survival only are all plusses in my book. Touhou is popular because of, well, moe and porn, but also because the easy setting for the first 3 levels are usually well paced for a casual gamer.

Anyway, this is kind of addressing the tangent. As for the original topic - reviewers should judge a game by its peers rather than ideals other modern games adhere to and it’s painful as a fan to see them say the games are too short, too hard if you play through properly and too easy if you effectively put £50 of credit into it. But they are seeing it the same way the average gamer reading their article does.

tl;dr: Arcade shmups are inherently cult, casual shmups mean the genre is alive and kicking and don't get too hung up on what reviewers say.

[No_not_like_Quake]

Someone should make a shmup for the next-generation, reimagine the genre for the 21st century and give gamers the surprise hit they never even knew they wanted! It won’t be a game, in fact, rather a pseudo science-fiction battle experience. It’ll have an intricate storyline told through hours of animated cut scenes and deep, searching dialogue. It’s more than just a game plot; it deconstructs the very society and ideals by which we stand. Players will strapped into a rollercoaster ride of emotion over 50 hours long, blasting the physics out of enemies and unlocking extra content such as alternative costumes, big head mode and, for the truly hardcore, a "not so easy" difficulty.

I'm not one to compliment but this amused me.

[Leeram]

I think the issue most people have with shmups is that they don't understand the point of them.

I hate the phrase "casual gamer" because it means nothing. I play every type of game. I play Guild Wars (250 hours and counting on my main character), I play FPS games (COD4 anyone? Counterstrike?), I play RTS (Supremem Commander - too many sleepless hours to count), I play platformers (All the Mario Games) and so on.

So by definitiion I am a casual gamer because I play all the casual games. Except I do it to excess, so I am a hardcore gamer. Casual gamer means nothing. It is merely a way to classify people who play games in a particular manner compared to oneself. I would love to see anyone here call the people that play Wii Sports (Bowling) for 200+ hours to get perfect rounds casual gamers...

Most "casual gamers" or should I say, most people who play games , do not play them obssesively, and that is the difference between them and us.

Games are not necessarily intense experiences, they can be, but more often than not aren't. Take Halo 3. Has there been more hype around a game than that one? No, I don't think so. I bought it. I played it. I completed it. And let me tell you. It was crap. Why? Because it was dull, repetitive and easy. But, with Halo, there is a point. There is a story, and you can complete it. You can click a button or two, type in a cheat code (I assume) and beat it. And most people will have FUN doing that.

Some people say that modern games are nothing like films, they only aspire to be films. Well, you are wrong. Most video games are EXACTLY like films. They are designed to give the player an experience that needs not a single brain cell to be engaged. You sit there, press a few buttons and "win". Exactly how you watch a film... you sit there, it happens, you feel good (normally) at the end. Except some people will play those games to excess. They will love those games, those games will, to them, be the best games ever

This is not a bad thing. It is a good thing. I laugh, literally, when I read comments about how mainstream games are so derivative and bad. NOTHING is more derivative than a shmup. Quite simply some of the best games ever to be released are out now, right now, and they are not shmups, they are 3D.

And that is the point. With the advent of 3D, games moved on. The humble shoot 'em up became 3D and took on a different moniker, ie., the FPS. Note that the S stands for shooter. Not shit, or bad, or crap, or mainstream, just a shoot-'em-up but in the first person. There are some stonking 3D games out there with all the excitement and skill of any 2D shoot 'em up. You take the best Cave game you can think of (for me its Ketsui) and I will tell you an FPS that's as good (COD 4). Yes they play differently, but they are just as good.

And back to my point. When I play a shmup I get a sense of purity. I spend hours working out the game mechanic, Espgaluda 2 being a good example. I know that to properly clear level one in any shmup I have to spend hours and hours working out where every bullet and baddy is. For me that is the appeal. But it is oh so quick. 10 hours of practice for a 5 minute level. What's the point? I got no achievements... I didn't get the high score (normally )... I get to level three and it's so hard I can't breath... There is no point, except the obsessive desire to beat it. I know that in that 5 minutes I have used every bit of skill I would have used in all of God of War 2 or Maximo {and if you want to play a hard 3d game, play Maximo}. But the majority of people, do not obsessively desire to beat a video game.

Most people just like to be entertained without too much thought. Despite what you think, the arcades of the '80s were for kids and most of them didn't complete a single game. They put in 10p, died, moved on. And those are the people that fuel the mainstream, but that doesn't mean that people out there aren't just as obsessive as we are. There are people that know every nook and cranny of Halo 3. How are they any different to you or me?

So the reviewers sit there, play a shmup and just don't see the point, where is the entertainment? The entertainment only appels to a minorty of gamers. It's a bit like Dragon's Lair, the best game ever to have been created. Every single review, ever, says how bad it is, yet go here... www.dragonslairproject.com... and the people would beg to differ. So if the game only appeals to a minority of gamers, why should reviewers give it a decent score? They are absolutely right to give Ketsui or whatever a 3, or 2 or 1, because they just don't see the point for the vast majority of people. It is absolutely right for them to not undersand the uniqueness of Gradius V compared to R-Type. It would be irrisponsible of them to give Ketsui a 10, because 99.999 percent of people will not like it.

So be happy that we play games of outstanding quality and design that should go down as the greatest games in history {particulalry Salamander }, don't worry about the reviewers because most people are not like us. To them, and their readers, our genre is not fun. Like Death Metal or Nu Rave is to some people. Each to his own. Vive Le Difference!

Cheers

Lee

[Ed Oscuro]

I play every type of game. [...] So by definitiion I am a casual gamer because

Whose definition?

Except I do it to excess, so I am a hardcore gamer.

Bingo

[kengou]

Leeram: I agree with your main point. I think comparing FPSes to shmups doesn't really work, though. Shmups didn't "evolve" into FPSes. To me they play very differently, except that you shoot things.

CoD4 (to use your example) plays nothing like any current shmup. Its arcade mode comes closer, but still has little to do with dodging bullets, memorizing bullet patterns, or mastering complex scoring mechanisms (ok, CoD4 arcade mode does have a scoring system with combos and more points granted for headshots/knifings, but it's not exactly as complex as Galuda or anything by Raizing). FPSes don't force you to move forward so the sense of urgency with a shmup isn't present. Even if you want to ignore that, however, the fact that just about every FPS nowadays doesn't demand any real dodging besides clever positioning/cover/erratic strafing/bunny hopping. The last shmup I played that seemed more shmup-like was Serious Sam because it involved actually dodging stuff.

To me, the 3D "evolution" of shmups was found in rail shooters like Star Fox and Sin & Punishment, and maybe even in games like Descent which were free-roaming and featured 3D movement in every direction and axis but also featured plenty of bullet-dodging and powerups.

Don't get me wrong, I love FPSes and RTSes and play most 3D genres to some extent (perhaps unlike some members of this forum, I don't know). I just see shmups and FPSes as very different games (they're different genres!). I find it hard to compare my all-time favorite game, Half-Life 2, with my all-time favorite shmup, Dodonpachi. I've played Dodonpachi for well over a year now, at least once a week, often daily. It's a game I can continually come back to and I'm sure it will be at least another year until I even get to the second loop. Half-Life 2, on the other hand, I can't replay as constantly because it's just not that type of game. Sure, I replay it every few months, along with the episodes, but it's not a game that compels me to play it on the highest difficulty over and over to beat it without dying. I tried "1ccing" CoD4's arcade mode but even that game is just too long to replay that much. Clearing the game would take something like 10 hours at least per run. I enjoyed playing through the campaign mode regularly, sure, but like all FPS games, it just plays in a different way than 2D arcade game and has different goals for the player.

On the other issue you brought up. I think reviewers should get a clue what they're talking about before assigning shmups a death sentence with a 6/10 rating. Reviewers understand other more popular genres like FPSes and RTSes (sometimes they mess up about more competitive aspects of some titles, but that's a different issue - or is it?). Reviews know what to expect from an FPS, they know how an FPS works, and they judge it accordingly. They DON'T know how a shmup works the way we know shmups. They don't understand the gameplay expected of the player in shmups. I mean, imagine if a reviewer went through an RTS, spamming a few units and sending them at the opponent with no regard for expanding or anything even a little "advanced", and when they get soundly beaten by the computer (or, more likely, other players online) the reviewer complains that the game has no depth and isn't very good? Reviewers are doing the same thing to shmups. They aren't playing them properly, they don't understand them, they suck at them, and they blame the games themselves and dismiss them without giving them a fair shot.

[J-Manic]

I just wanna say fuck all the mainstream reviewers. Thank you, and have a nice evening.

[PROMETHEUS]

There's very little that is similar between FPSs and STGs indeed, FPSs require much, much more advanced tactics and with complex use of space and physics in the best games (like Quake III). There is also no pattern reading. The only thing that is similar is probably the fact that you need awesome reflexes and vision to play them well. But most if not all competitive video games require that. Solo FPSs on the other hand are just some kind of art piece (like Half Life 2), perhaps like some STGs to some extent, but then again many other genres feature that kind of gameplay.

[Taylor]

The meaning of casual when used to refer to gamers usually means "people who play less games than me," while hardcore is "people who play games more than me." I believe they abbreviate these to "noob" and "no lifer" in some circles, and I agree they are rather vague terms.

But for classifying a game the words are much clearer, and refer to accessibility. Pop Cap games are the epitome of casual, they are all easy to pick up and play, and everyone understands them. You can get through most modern big-budget releases these days with some attrition, usually thanks to checkpoints or quicksave, making them accessible for the pick-up-and-play gamer. Whereas Hardcore games are not accessible - arcade games, Ninja Gaiden and Devil May Cry (before DMC4 perhaps) are great examples. They assume you are familiar with the genre and drop you straight into the action with no hand-holding, and if you are not the required skill level you will not progress.

Anyway, semantics aside, I don’t agree Ketsui should get a bad score because the average punter will not like it. As I said before a game should be judged by its peers, by other games of the same genre, the person reading the review should be smart enough to know if they like a whole genre or not.

[Leeram]

Hi again,

I wasn't trying to say that shmups can be compard to COD4 (or FPS in general) directly, in terms of game style. I was just trying to say that COD4 is as good a game as any shmup, despite being 3D, and you can be as hard-core a COD4 player as you can be a DoDonPAchi player.

To continue the example COD4 is something the mainstream reviewers will recognise and see the point of. They usually score it 9 or 10/10. However HALO 3 gets exactly the same scores, if not higher, yet it is no-where near the greatness of COD4. If you give COD4 a 10 you should be giving HALO 3 a 7 or 8.

The reviewers are doing a "reverse shmups" thing. They understand HALO, they understand the point of it and they know that their audience will see the point of it. So despite it being a crappy game they score it wrongly, i.e. too high

With shmups they don't understand it, so they score it lower than they should. But I don't think it's fair to expect a general games reviewer to review a game based on some kind of peer assessment. I suppose it would not be too difficult to say something like "if you like your shmups this is a 10/10, otherwise steer clear, 2/10" though.

Games reviewers have to target their reviews to the target audience of the magazine or whatever they write for. If we expect games reviewers to understand the nuances of every game for every genre before reviewing, and then aim the review only at the core people who play it, games reviews wouldn't be worth reading for the majority of people who play games like watching a film, and buy the magazine in question.

I do think Ketsui should get a bad score because the average punter will not like it if it is from a mainstream reviewer, or more accurately, I think it should get a bad score if the reviewer didn't like it, because he is guiding his audience. Now if you ask me the same question about a specialist reviewer, I would probably give a different answer

Cheers

Lee

[kengou]

Hi again,

I wasn't trying to say that shmups can be compard to COD4 (or FPS in general) directly, in terms of game style. I was just trying to say that COD4 is as good a game as any shmup, despite being 3D, and you can be as hard-core a COD4 player as you can be a DoDonPAchi player.

To continue the example COD4 is something the mainstream reviewers will recognise and see the point of. They usually score it 9 or 10/10. However HALO 3 gets exactly the same scores, if not higher, yet it is no-where near the greatness of COD4. If you give COD4 a 10 you should be giving HALO 3 a 7 or 8.

The reviewers are doing a "reverse shmups" thing. They understand HALO, they understand the point of it and they know that their audience will see the point of it. So despite it being a crappy game they score it wrongly, i.e. too high

With shmups they don't understand it, so they score it lower than they should. But I don't think it's fair to expect a general games reviewer to review a game based on some kind of peer assessment. I suppose it would not be too difficult to say something like "if you like your shmups this is a 10/10, otherwise steer clear, 2/10" though.

Games reviewers have to target their reviews to the target audience of the magazine or whatever they write for. If we expect games reviewers to understand the nuances of every game for every genre before reviewing, and then aim the review only at the core people who play it, games reviews wouldn't be worth reading for the majority of people who play games like watching a film, and buy the magazine in question.

I do think Ketsui should get a bad score because the average punter will not like it if it is from a mainstream reviewer, or more accurately, I think it should get a bad score if the reviewer didn't like it, because he is guiding his audience. Now if you ask me the same question about a specialist reviewer, I would probably give a different answer

Cheers

Lee

I disagree. Reviews of virtually every other genre don't have disclaimers like that. When was the last time you saw "if you don't like FPSes, steer clear of CoD4, 2/10. Otherwise, 9/10." Or, "I don't like RTSes. I rated SupCom a 4/10. However, if you're a hardcore RTS fan, maybe you'll like it. I won't bother to explain the more advanced concepts of the gameplay or anything because I just really don't understand it or care to try to understand it." And yet this is exactly what happens for reviews of Shmups, as well as some other less mainstream genres. Reviewers who like FPSes review FPSes. They review the game for other people who like FPSes. If you don't like FPSes, and you know you don't like them, you just steer clear of the review because you know you won't like the game already. I usually don't read RPG reviews because it's not a genre I'm generally fond of. If I do read one, though, and the reviewer gives it a 9/10, they don't go on to say "but, if you hate RPGs, steer clear" because it's just implied.

For shmup reviews, as you can see in my article, most of these reviews mention "I didn't really like it for [whatever reason]. This game is only for the most hardcore shooter fan to enjoy."

I want equality in reviews, is that so much to ask?

[Jockel]

kengou: i know this is completely off topic, but have you tried Dragon Quest VIII? This game got me out of my non-rpg-phase.

[kengou]

kengou: i know this is completely off topic, but have you tried Dragon Quest VIII? This game got me out of my non-rpg-phase.

Nope. Does it have random enemy encounters? That's usually the first make-or-break aspect of RPGs for me. Only ones I really like are Chrono Trigger and KotoR.

[VorpalEdge]

blasting the physics out of enemies

Hyperbole aside, that's actually a really good idea.

[Observer]

I've been lurking for so long I forgot I wasn't even registered. I wanted to point out that this isn't new to me... I used to buy a crap load of magazines when I was younger and I always recall the Giga Wing, Mars Matrix, Twinkle Stars Sprites and Gunbird 2 reviews. All for DC, they all got absolutely destroyed and I'll be posting scans from the magazines so you can have a good laugh... if you know spanish. I can provide translations if needed but in short: it's all whining because the games are TOO HARD.

Those reviews (or attempt of reviews) respond to the usual patterns and, to add insult to the injury, are cramped in a single column. For the sake of respect and anonymity I'm blurring the name of the authors since they used to sign with their real names and all.

Without further delays, Twinkle Star Sprites gets 4%!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v365/Wyrm/twss.jpg

It spends so much time criticising the graphics... This will be a constant.

edit: I forgot to mention all the stg reviews were done by the same person so that shows extreme idiocy from the editorial staff for passing those titles to someone who clearly hates the genre.

Check this combo of Giga Wing, Mars Matrix and Gunbird. It's funny how the guy eventually keeps saying that the others are so bad that they make Giga Wing look like a masterpiece.

But the worst case is with Mars Matrix. He points out you have to dodge impossible amounts of bullets I think the idiot never ever bothered to find out how the freaking game actually works! Same for Giga Wing. You don't see the shield system mentioned anywhere and it complains the game is too short and only has 7 stages to credit-feed through. Nice, because Ikaruga has 5. And Samidare has 3+Extra.

Scans: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v365/Wyrm/reviews.jpg

However, Ikaruga only got flowers from them. And from EGM. Because, you know, it's Ikaruga and it's supposed to be good because everyone says so and such. (by the way, I think Ikaruga is a great shooter)

[Mortificator]

Thanks for posting these. I thought Virtua Athlete was lame and TSS was cool, but now I'm educated and know that VA is actually seventeen times better!

[orange]

i wish ikaruga would've got bad reviews

[kengou]

i wish ikaruga would've got bad reviews

I love Ikaruga but it's just a mystery why it got such good reviews while most other shmups get panned.

[jpj]

how come?

i'm sure if you look hard enough, there'll be one or two people who try really hard to be different about it (check out http://insomnia.ac), but the overall positivity from the media over ikaruga is great for the shmup hobby, even if you don't enjoy the game as much yourself. maybe i have weird view on it, because i virtually never actually read a review. but i would be glad if some of the more mediocre games of recent years had big write ups in the professional magazines. gradius v had an even bigger hype around it in the UK mags. same sort of scores (8/10 or higher) but featured in a lot of mags, even official playstation. in fact, bizarrely it was the Edge review which was actually best giving it a solid 9/10 and was actually a damn fine write-up (which i hate to admit). and edge also have reviewed chaos field, under defeat, and some other import DC titles. but best of all was probably the 8/10 review for espgaluda on ps2. i don't care if they don't get the scoring mechanic or whatever, or didn't fully understand the kakesui system; as long as a review shows a positive side to shmups, i'm for it

edit: is it really so mysterious?

[Taylor]

Most reviewers saw the polarity shtick breathing new life into a stagnant, dated genre. It also got a lot of hype and was labelled as ‘art’ by certain games journalists, so the others couldn’t exactly give it a bad score in the face of it.

Interestingly, while I’ve met several people cite Ikaruga as a great (or the greatest) shmup ever for it’s groundbreaking polarity mechanic, I’ve yet to meet someone who said that and has actually played it.

Fake Edit: Hit preview and I've been beaten, but posting anyway

Real Edit: That paragraph was a bit weird. I'm not implying Ikaruga is a bad game.

[spadgy]

I just wanna say fuck all the mainstream reviewers. Thank you, and have a nice evening.

Where do you want me J-Magic? Over a table perhaps?

Observer - thanks so much for those scans. I can't read Spanish much at all, so can only laugh at the ridiculously misguided scores. I guess everybody's entitled to dislike a game or set of games, and all reviews are subjective and all that, and I can't really say much as I can't read the Spanish, but I'm pretty confident that mag needs to take a look at selecting the right reviewer for the right genre!

[Observer]

The mag got wiped out in 2003 but the same staff made a new magazine whose only stg title I spotted was our little argentine Protöthea, which got a 75% because IT WAS TOO HARD and the graphics weren't that good. I'm talking about the PC version though, that's the one I bought (for dirt cheap, less than 8usd) and plays a bit better than the abortion that came out for the Wii, which only got a lot of bad mouthing as far as I know.

But this is for that Protöthea thread I spotted a couple of weeks ago. Might necro-post there =P

I have more scans, this time for the hilariously ridiculous EGM in spanish, which has a bunch of english translated reviews mixed with some of the mexican writers.

Here is, for you, the people, Ikaruga for Gamecube getting a big 9.0 and a preview blabbering about it:

Preview
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v365/Wyrm/img170.jpg
(little Ikaruga cute bird and TATE mode explained... at least is something)

Review
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v365/Wyrm/img169.jpg
("Juégalo diez horas para créditos ilimitados", come on, guys, this isn't Famitsu, you know what that means? "Play it 10 hours for infinite credits", great protip there! It also points out the bad - Lo Malo - indicating the game might be "too short")

This is what irks me. No stg/shmup seems to fit next to the games it's placed with!!! (yes, I know, Dynasty Warriors for PS2 is on the next page)

I'll check my old (well, let's say 1993-1996) magazines to see if there are stg reviews. I remember marvelling myself with Aleste images, Silpheed (the original), R-Type...

So, my point of view (not necessarily the truth): for the mainstream the only shooter after Radiant Silvergun was Ikaruga. Then R-Type Final seemingly put an end to R-Type series and Gradius V showed up for PS2 and that's it. The rest are 30-60% old fashioned 'retro' crap living from the past.

I played Ikaruga for DC and loved it because I love over the top stuff and it quite delivered in that field. That moment in Chapter 5, when you have the gloriously synchronised laser-missile duel with the yin-yang phase of the Tageri, is something I can hardly forget. That colour switching chaos was priceless!

And who doesn't love that ridiculous robotic voice? "Press Start Button", "Easy Mode", "Accept". Ikaruga might not be the jewel they say it is but I still think it's a great game. However, 10 hours with DoDonPachi and... well, that's another story.

[GrimoreLibrarian]

Mario liked Ikaruga! That might explain why it got a Game Cube port.

10+ hours on DoDonpachi? Still trying to no miss it?

I didn't think you would show up here so soon, Observer.

(I'm DarkBahamut and AlundraGaidenMax)

[Observer]

Mario liked Ikaruga! That might explain why it got a Game Cube port.

10+ hours on DoDonpachi? Still trying to no miss it?

I didn't think you would show up here so soon, Observer.

(I'm DarkBahamut and AlundraGaidenMax)

hahaha! Hi there. About time I show up. To avoid getting offtopic, yep, I officially counted 10 hours but maybe it was even more due to restarting the game if I got owned in stage 2 or something.

I carried a quick search on my old magazines (they go as far as 1992) and found some interesting things. I'll scan those for later as some of them might pop up memories.

One actually interesting constant? The reviews, previews and info about stgs was extremely scarce even back then! I counted 1 review in 5 months in a row, 2 previews and one review in another and so on. And don't think they treated them that well either... Soon you'll see.

[oxtsu]

Hardcore Gamer! [GUNBIRD2 review]

http://www.defunctgames.com/shows.php?id=review-596

rofl

[kengou]

Hardcore Gamer! [GUNBIRD2 review]

http://www.defunctgames.com/shows.php?id=review-596

rofl

That was pretty painful.

I don't even like Gunbird 2 especially (I agree with his 65/100) but I still just couldn't stand the reasons he gave. I mean, the 2nd and third paragraphs were about the graphics and story, and he wasn't too favorable.

"Gunbird 2 can be beat in about 30 minutes, even shorter in co-op where you can fry the bosses way too quickly. So it's not really worth the price of admission."

"There is no depth nor strategy, just power your gun up as high as you can and try not to get shot."

Hoo boy... but this is still par for the course, unfortunately.

[Rob]

but way back in the 16 bit era games like M.U.S.H.A. on the Genesis brought more strategy and depth to the table.

[bostongeorge]

They did make the game playable in three different screen styles; include one where you turn your TV on its side Ikaruga-style , which is the best way to play.

HAHA Proof that the Gunbird 2 reviewers experience with STGs is limited.

Although I AGREE of course.

[Rob]

Glossary is worthless without Ikaruga-style.

[Zuhzuhzombie!!]

All I know is, Chaos Field is awful.

[Ravid]

Hardcore Gamer! [GUNBIRD2 review]

http://www.defunctgames.com/shows.php?id=review-596

rofl

Quite apart from anything else, his English is terrible (IDENTICLE lol).