I don't trust RPS. That Meer guy is going to shiv me in my sleep, I know it. Well, I'm fucking ready for him. He's in for the bludgeoning of the decade if he tries it.
I don't trust RPS. That Meer guy is going to shiv me in my sleep, I know it. Well, I'm fucking ready for him. He's in for the bludgeoning of the decade if he tries it.
But seriously. Every game I've played as a result of RPS mind-wave-o-tron (you may know it as a "website" in the primitive gloop you call the 21st century) has been enjoyable and/or interesting as a minimum, with one notable exception.
That's a pretty damn good hit rate over the three years or so I've been reading. They're not perfect, of course (the latest secret Quinns-bot is still a prototype, after all), but then neither are any other three or four people in the world.
I know for a fact that the RPS chaps are intelligent and very skilled writers. I know that they're enthusiastic and knowledgeable about video games. I have no reason to doubt that they're as honest as humans can realistically be (though Jim still denies killing all those priests, that doesn't really affect the games thing). Therefore they say the things they believe, based on trusted contacts, investigation and/or research, and we're all free to agree or disagree as we see fit, and construct an idea of whether or not we'll like a game based on their comments.
So really, I don't get what your problem is, guy. Believe me, I've been down the "games journos are corrupt!!" road before (I could link you to some very silly comments of my own from a few years back on the subject), and I'm sure there are a few out there who really are, same as there are in any occupation.
But it's quite ridiculous to suggest that RPS, of all people, are willing to sacrifice their integrity for a quick buck, just because they have adverts and don't exclusively say the things you want them to say, all the time. I mean, I don't give a flying fuck if every Mug's Edition of every game in the world is obliterated. It's not inherently newsworthy, and if none of the writers are personally interested in such a small story, why would they write about it? How could they possibly cover everything if even a delay to a meaningless trinket has to be written about? They have to sleep occasionally, you know, and since they murdered Quinns they're a man down.
I just can't see any reason to believe that RPS are somehow corrupt. If they were they'd have accepted my money for a go on Walker.
And if you disagree, and I say this in the nicest way, why not just go somewhere else?
Last edited by sinister agent; 22-09-2011 at 07:11 AM. Reason: de-confrontationalisation of tonal naturity
It's a non-issue for you. Some of us may want the collector's edition, or be interested in it, and as such it's an issue for us. There's also the bigger picture in which it shows that the PC has been sidelined to some degree and that the studio/publisher haven't got a clue what their fans want. For Arkham City itself, they've made a big song and dance about PhysX and higher quality textures (Oh wow I am so excited about that I've never had PhysX in a game before), they've added 3D (For the few who have it) and they've gone and whacked GfWL onto it despite a lot of people not liking it or having problems with it, but also despite developers generally moving away from it.Originally Posted by mpk
If you don't want the CE, fine, but there was absolutely no need for that attitude.
Again, I'm not criticising them as such for it as I know they're a small team, but I'm saying a bit more attention on situations where PC gamers get less for no reason wouldn't go amiss because, as you rightly said, I think it's important. I need more than two hands to count all the instances I can think of where PC gamers have come off worse for no reason, and I think if anyone can do a look at the industry in that style, it'd be RPS. The Escapist is just shit, PC Gamer is a load of wank and Kotaku is too busy fawning over Japanese ladies with breasts the size of Humvee wheels.
That was a joke, right? I mean, I hope you know that theyre canadian.. (the thing about the french is true, cant argue with that.)
- Tom De Roeck.
monochrom & verse publications
"Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."
And so we come to the root of the issue which is that the RPS writers cover the stories that they want to, and not what other people tell them to. Which, as far as I'm concerned, results in the finest PC gaming website on the intarwebs.
Dear Redox, I did try to explain how internet advertising works. :) Trust me. I did this stuff myself, on both sides.
Anyway!
I read RPS because:
I am entertained by their articles.
RPS-staff like the games I like. The reason they like the games I like are usually the same reasons I have for liking the games I like. This makes me trust their recommendations.
I am entertained by the community and comments.
My games-related Twitter: VexingVision
Currently playing: Gothic 2; Blood Bowl: Chaos Edition; Waking Mars; Anno Online
As usual, this absurd Batman collector's edition complaint can be summed with the fact that RPS's attitude always seems to be more that it's their blog (as in, they write about what they want to write about, not trying to cover everything), not their attempt an all-conquering news site.
So please, please would people stop asking such an excellent site to be something it's not?
Pretty please?
A brave heart and a courteous tongue. They shall carry thee far through the jungle, manling.
In a word, yes.
I think the only response to redox in all seriousness has to be this:
QQ lol.
Last edited by GraveyardJimmy; 22-09-2011 at 07:12 PM.
Montreuil is not Montreal. They're French.
Unless you're making some joke I'm missing.
"Moronic cynicism is a kind of naïveté. It's naïveté turned inside-out. Naïveté wearing a sneer." -Momus
Ubisoft are French. They have offices in different countries, including the French part of Canada. Now can we please get back to the important issues being discussed in this thread, like, er. Oh wait.
It was really cold in the morning today, so I put on an extra T-shirt before walking to school. Unfortunately the sun came out so I started sweating loads. These are troubled times.
The bigger ubisoft things are being made in canada, thats also where they have the segregation stuff I was talking about.
- Tom De Roeck.
monochrom & verse publications
"Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."
It did get referenced in the original piece: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011...ctors-edition/ - to be honest I have a feeling John might well have picked up on it if it didn't happen when he was moving house and had no internet access... I also imagine it'll get mentioned closer to the time or in the review, it's just not really a pressing immediate issue (we're well past the point where they could make any PC editions and get them out on time now).
I don't remember the name, but I got once a game that RPS put in very good terms. And the game was bad to me.
This made me trust RPS a bit less. Wen RPS say a game is very good, it is probably very good, but not on all cases will be fun to me.
So wen RPS say that a obscure Indie game is fun, It pays to check the game, because 9/10 times is worth testing it. Wen RPS recomend games (or talk in good terms) about games, I agree the 9/10 of times. Theres this 1 of 10 that we will not agree, and I have no way to know what game will be.
Fortunally enough, theres a lot of information on the internet to decide about games.
So a better question than "should I trust RPS?" is "does RPS' bias hew to my bias?" and that's a personal question.
I pick "I don't trust any reviews from any site."
I try to take what info I can from every review I read and find my own middle ground. Sometimes I dive into Something Awful and see what goons think too. If I trusted RPS I may never have bought New Vegas and that would make my world significantly darker. Some of their points were right in that case, although I personally never experienced 90 percent of the bugs they talked about.
I agree with you zeek and I think thats the key thing with RPS, reviews are intrinsically subjective and I appreciate that RPS are honest enough to admit this, their reviews are purely the thoughts of the writer and you take from that what you will, they give an impression but it is only the writers impression
As long as redox insists on posting one of these inane threads once every couple of days I can only suggest this as opposed to actually feeding the troll.
Yes, the ignore button. This is the first time I've ever felt the need to use it in all my years of posting on forums. The best part is that the forum doesn't highlight the threads he starts as new and unread so you can feel like you're keeping up with everything that's being posted without actually having to read his threads.
weekendwarrio.rs - We've got more games than time...
Another interesting point - why trust? Why would we trust people we don't know anyway? The most we can ever do is have a general trust for how valid we believe their reviewing is, and that's only based on the level of disparity between our opinions on games and theirs. ie, subjective, just the same as ANY piece of opinion writing. If there were facts that were simply lied about, it would be a different matter, but it's not. Even if they were all paid off to review games I think are terrible as good, and vice versa, there would still be some people with views closer to them than my own. Anyone who really thinks 'trust' is vital for something we read for free is a fool. At the end of the day, I'll be guided by a number of outlets and amalgamate opinions that I have come, over time, to believe fall vaguely in line with my own. If I spend money on something, it's still my own choice, and I should own that. As should everyone else.
Posting Permissions
