Let The Conduit review backlash begin

Gonintendo writes:
"It seems that people all around the web are calling out GamePro over the review, feeling that it just wasn't very well done.

Now these complaints are boiling over into NeoGAF and the GamePro staff as well. Check out what one GamePro staffer had to say via Twitter.

"they (people that read the review) don't (like the review) -- because it's not in line with what IGN said. Tae's dislike of the controls caught flack with arguments like..."you can change the input". The output was what he knocked. Just a bunch of crybabies not seeing the star count they wanna. - MitchyD"

[Shoko]

The guy who wrote the review DIDN'T EVEN PLAY THE MULTIPLAYER, so basically, he played HALF THE GAME. The review was bull. And he complained about the motion controls for throwing grenades and the melee..........although you can take those action off and put them on buttons.

[qface64]

i decided to look up the review to see what all the talk was about
all i can say is
DAMNNNNNNNNN

that was one assy of a review i think i could have done better and that's saying something right there

i just lost faith in gamepro

[Anon1974]

If you don't like his review and don't personally agree with it, learn from it and don't read his reviews in the future.

I, for example, enjoyed Killzone 2. Edge ended up giving it a 7, not a bad score, but then turned around and gave Onechanbara a 7 as well - and that game is a steaming pile. From that I learned that Edge has no consistency in their reviews and now their opinion of games is shot for me. You learn and move on. Simple as that.

That's what GamePro did here. The effectively gave it a 7. Not a bad score at all. Play it and see if you agree. Ultimately it all boils down to each individual gamer.

[SinnedNogara]

@ qface

You trusted GamePro to begin with??

But seriously, they need to do a re-review. They need to play the whole game in order to give a good score. I don't think they even tried the control customization. It's like if I played one level and half a level of multiplayer and did a review. But I don't, so that's why my reviews are usually late.

[qface64]

i never liked em for their reviews
i would just browse through em from time to time for some articles they would have

[kwyjibo]

Edge didn't even bother reviewing any of the Onechanbara games.

You're not going to find a single source of opinion that you agree with all the time.

[N4g_null]

WOW I got the game now and the concept art is way beyond generic! I can't wait to see some of these guys in game!

[MEsoJD]

Well he played the game and you haven't so wait until you get it for

yourself. Might turn out that you hate the game.

[akashifire]

Stuff that sucks about reviewing games #475: You jot down a poignantly hilarious aside, heroically skewering a game for a specific fault… then you check the menu and realize that it’s optional/adjustable and you look like an asshole for not being thorough.

- Games Radar

[Shoko]

He basically said it looks like an N64 game............cmon man? Seriously? If the graphics don't impress you, that's 100% fine, but to say it looks like Goldeneye? I don't see how anyone could take this review seriously.

[Smacktard]

I don't care about the score he gave it. Just the way he reviewed it. It was very unprofessional.

G4's review, which scored it worse, turned it from a "reluctant buy" to a "rent and see how it goes", however.

[SinnedNogara]

True, I always felt G4 to be a little bias. They gave Halo 3 a 5/5, even though the game suffers the same problems The Conduit apparently does.

IGN and GT do much better reviews. They are in-depth, and even though I still like G4, GT and IGN are much better.

I'll do a review as soon as I get it. We all should.

Thank God that TheMart can't comment here!!!

[TheDeadMetalhead]

You'll see my review up here. ;o

[Smacktard]

To be honest, I think The Conduit is getting way too much flak... much more than it deserves. You pointed out that Halo 3 got a 5/5 and suffers from the same problems The Conduit does. This is mostly true. Halo 3's story is probably better than The Conduits, and its multiplayer options are more vast, but this is the Wii, and some people are judging this as if it's a PC shooter. I think it's just getting a lot of flak simply because it's on the Wii.

[--Onilink--]

any reviewer who even dares to complain about the controllers in this game doesnt deserve to be doing any reviews.. knock it down for anything else you want, generic FPS, predictable story, too much run-gun, even for graphics then claim to be legally bling if you want...but the controllers???? this is by FAR the MOST CUSTOMIZABLE console game ever in terms of controls, so i quite frankly cannot see how the hell he can complain about that, you can map almost every single action to whatever button you want, adjust the sensitivity on every aspect you can imagine, the only thing stopping you from having the best controller options available would be your inability to move some simple bar for one side to the other.

And to anyone looking for a great and fun shooter, do not hesitate to buy it, and that way yyou can be sure you are supporting a company thats really putting some effort to bring quality titles to wii and doesnt deserve to receive this type of unfunded bashing

[ZOMBIEMAN1]

look at all the cry babies in gamer zone there basically just what the gamepro staff member said they were you guys complain and complain so what if you can change the controls they reviewed the game on default settings so what while i disagree with it looking like a N64 game but i've seen better games like MGS3 , Doom 3 RE0 , remake , 4 Halo, GOW 1 & 2 , Metriod Prime 3 and i mean graphically

[ChickeyCantor]

" so what if you can change the controls "

Point is that he rushed trough a game he didn't feel like playing at all, complaining about stuff.

For instance, he says story is confusing, while in his review he stated that he just hit the A button to skip it.
He said controls don't really fit well, while infact he didnt even open the menu to change all of it.
On top of that he didn't even play the multiplayer. HE PLAYED HALF THE GAME.

No one is complaining about the score, rather that this guy is just unproffesional in pointing out things.

Seriously, this is one of the worst reviews I have ever read.
But on the other hand i don't give much what this person says or what rating he gives. I shall try this game out myself.

Any reviewer should have some logic to his review, this one has non.

[ZOMBIEMAN1]

dude he was lying no reviewer is allowed to skip the cute scene what he said about skipping cut scenes was basically how he felt but he didn't do it no matter how bad a cut scene is a reviewer has to sit thru em he should have said that's what he wanted to do instead of saying he did also if he was rushing thru it just proves something is bad like when i played Damnation on PS3 i just wanted to finish the game as quick as possible and seeing the massive areas didn't help either so again it wasn't a badly written review but he should have chosen his words carefully.
@ 360 Wii PS3 Yup
true he didn't talk about MP but don't you think the MP was added to the score and true he should have mentioned how costumizable it was but no review site or at least the ones i go to talked about KZ2's costumizable controls but really do you care what this guy thinks no are you going to play the game regardless of what he said yes so what's the problem ?

[Monteblanco]

@Zombieman1: I didn't even checked Killzone 2's controls customization as I thought the preset was good. However, the so called critic said a low point were the motion controls and It seems he never realized he could change into button presses. Also, online multiplayer is the bread and butter of FPS nowadays. As such, any shooter review has to include a discussion of it. Personally, I don't care for the score and I rarely play online, but I still know when I read a poorly written review.

[ZOMBIEMAN1]

it wasn't poorly written it was lacking some info but if i recall some reviewers didn't talk about RFOM & KZ2's MP portion

[ChickeyCantor]

Why is everyone so upset by this review? =( i have to wait till 10Th of july to try this game on my own =/

We should rampage over that >_>

[Myst]

*pushes a cart full of pitchforks and already lit torches over toward the side*

Get your pitch forks here, can't have a mob without pitchforks and torches, come get 'em here while they are still Free!

[ChickeyCantor]

Do you have one with glitters?

[Myst]

Fresh out :/

[phantomexe]

lol pass me one.Get sidar and spoony one too.There comeing too.spoony hasn't posted yet but he will.

[kesvalk]

screw the pitchfork, i want a hammer!!!

[condorstrike]

well the only good thing about that review is that it backlashed on them, since they've always been a biased mag, we all know how much IGN loves the x360 but at least they're not biased or at least it doesn't show, but with these guys, the dislike towards the Wii has always been obvious .

[EvilxM]

I usually have great control of my fanboyism (I equally like Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft), but I have to share some sentiments.

When reading the review, it felt rushed and not indepth. He said he didn't try the online out. You have to examine every aspect of a game before giving a full review. That'd be like trying Halo 3 single-player campaign and then projecting that to be like multiplayer, but with more players and such. You need to actually experience it first-hand.

[desolationstorm]

I guess its all opinion, but he's a bad game journalist. Most everything has been addressed on the web yelling at this guy. Though his review didn't seem like a review, more like taking shots at the game.

Its frustrating when you read a review like this. I prefer to be open minded and don't get mad at a review that doesn't agree with my opinion. Stuff like that will always happen. The fact that this guy gets paid for his opinions is frustrating. I don't see how that could be considered a satisfactory review of a game. His review kinda reminded me of the people who comment on articles without even reading them. Just enough to form an opinion.

When two of the selling points for a game are online multiplayer and fully customizable controls. Then in a review someone complains about the controls and states that they played it on default controls. Seems like someone should do their job.

Why not review MGS4 and skip all the cut scenes and say the story was nonexistent. Or how about review Halo3 without mp, because I don't know it seems like an important part of that game. But Ill score the game on a whole with someones opinions on that part of it.

If this is journalism then why go to school for it?

[TheDeadMetalhead]

We're crybabies because we expect a review from a large site/magazine such as Gamepro to at least be thorough and well-written?

Nobody cares about the score. It's the poorly-written review that's pissing people off. If you're going to complain about a game, at least have valid reasons to back it up. This guy didn't try customizing the controls, he didn't play the multiplayer, and he probably didn't even bother to complete the single player mode. =/

[free2game365]

People are only complaining about this being poorly reviewed because it upsets fanboys. Almost all game reviews I've run into are poorly written.

[Monteblanco]

You're right for most things. Game journalism writing is somewhat lacking and most complaints are from fanboys as no one, except fanboys, will waste time complaining about game reviews. However, fanboys are sometimes right and this is the case regarding this very biased review of the Conduit, as the journalist definitely failed to explore many important features of the game and got some points wrongly.

[aaron5829]

Until now... and wow, i didnt know the conduit has such an impressive graphics... for a Wii.

And gamepro says it's visuals are unimpressive ? now i sense the anger !

LOL

[phantomexe]

It your going to do a review Gamepro at least play the damn game.Kind of odd how 3 sites give it a good or far review.You wonder why people don't vist your site that much...it's to hard to beleave what you post on.It not about crying fanboys it's about posting the facts.Don't review what you spent 5 mins playing.It does't matter what game you play.I'll take that survey after i vist the site next time on how the vist was.

[bjornbear]

This guy seems like he HATED reviewing the game...or had a good time lashing out at it =/

Shame, he just lost his credibility in the gaming comunity not for his opinion, but lack of professionalism

[Seferoth75]

It's nice that most people understand the hate. It's not the score at all. It's his attitude toward the game and his lack of professionalism.

[asyouburn]

gamepro give ninja blade a five out of five?

[mrv321]

I really hate sites that don't review the multiplayer for certain games, they gave COD 4 it's score on Multiplayer alone (not the singleplayer it's dreadful).

[EvilTwin]

COD4's single player was short (if not shorter than The Conduit), and I don't remember anyone raving about the storyline.

Plot-wise, I don't know where some of these reviewers are coming from. It's not like Halo had THAT great a story. It was standard sci-fi fare, tbh. And that's what Conduit has, too. Who the hell plays a multi-player-centric FPS primarily for the single-player story?

Don't any of these so-called hardcore game reviewers think "wow, look at these controls, I'll be popping headshots like no one's business online"?

[PS360PCROCKS]

Lol wow I wonder if that dude hates the Wii? That was a harsh review

[Xander-RKoS]

Uh it kinda sucks. On one hand, some reviewers don't even give the Wii a chance, and thus judge this game way too harshly for elements that many other games have but are often ignored. On the other hand, some sources know their audience and to say The Conduit is bad will instantly kill the readership.

It sucks that due to personal circumstances I have to wait a month to play this game, but I think The Conduit it definitely going to be one of those games where the score of the review doesn't matter, but what the review actually talks about.