GhostPig Comments

Page 1 of 5

  • Gran Turismo 6 review

  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @porkface Good to hear - and thanks for your replies. Appreciate it. Reply +2
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @melnificent Not mine. First heard of it in Fahey's op-ed here: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-29-is-this-the-start-of-the-paymium-generation Reply 0
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @porkface Cheers for answering. If it's the same grind it's always been, in the context of lower payouts and fewer cars, but flatlined car prices as well daunting tier 6 grinds - those paragraphs honestly give the opposite impression: economies obviously can't be identical if the payouts are lower - especially in the system implemented to reduce grinding - and if the grinding's been given a bump, it's equally hard to see the introduction of microtransactions as a pure coincidence. Alarm bells everywhere, as I'm sure you understand.

    I realise that it's a vast game, and short of hiring a firm of auditors to comb through both 5 and 6 playing spot-the-difference, it's impossible to know these things for certain, while too much like-for-like turns a review into a spreadsheet. (Also, look how subtle and clever they've been: querying it just makes you look like you're nit-picking.)

    Having said all that, since microtransactions are the current hot topic, and since you wrote that article about them in November, would you consider a follow-up looking at these systems in a bit more detail? Stopping the rot not only relies on we consumers not buying the stuff, but also on journalists refusing to stay quiet on the subject. You up for that?
    Reply +7
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @johnnyquicknives

    No it doesn't make it clear. The economies can't be functionally identical if payouts are lower (as CVG reports) and if there are fewer car rewards and "paltry" seasonal payouts. That's the basic contradiction I'm referring to, which this review doesn't resolve.

    If - repeat if - it really is pay-or-grind, then that's a weird score coming from a man who, only a fortnight ago, was telling us that pay-or-grind was corrupting, dishonest, and shamelessly greedy. Contradiction number two.
    Reply +3
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @Guy.J. Certainly looks that way on the current evidence, although it's still not entirely clear. If it is true, then it makes you wonder why he's given such a high score to a game that includes what he himself describes as a "disrespectful, dishonest practice" that corrupts game design, due to the "shameless greed" of "cynical publishers". Seems a bit inconsistent, to say the least (assuming it really is pay-or-grind). Reply +1
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @johnnyquicknives

    That's not the bottom line: he mentions in passing that they were unobtrusive, but the bulk of his remarks talk about how they're a "problem" and "far from savoury". He also adds that car rewards are lower, and the seasonals are paltry, and CVG meanwhile reports that the same race in 5 pays less in 6.

    All of which makes it seem likely that the economies are not identical, and the already high levels of GT grind have been increased to encourage microtransactions.

    That's what I want him to clarify - whether or not that's the case. Because the review above doesn't make it clear.

    (And also because he himself made such a big fuss about the issue back in November.)
    Reply +1
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @johnnyquicknives

    An in-game economy is about numbers (not look-and-feel) so it's possible to be objective about it.

    Have a look at CVG's review as well. They actually gave some figures, and also marked GT6 down for "slow progress without microtransactions".
    Reply +1
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    @CamberGreber That's exactly what I'd like him to clarify. Reply -1
  • GhostPig 06/12/2013

    Oh dear, Mr Robinson...

    The economy is, to all intents and purposes, identical to Gran Turismo 5's - prize cars aren't handed out quite so generously, but payouts are on a similar scale while car prices likewise remain frozen.
    But:

    Seasonals are back, though right now the payouts are paltry in comparison to their predecessors, meaning the grind that faces players just before they unlock Gran Turismo 6's final tier is daunting.
    So the economy is identically borked. But now seasonals pay less. And microtransactions have been added. And there's "daunting" grinding.

    To all appearances, that looks exactly like the "paymium" or "pay-or-grind" mechanics you fulminated against recently:

    The grind of Gran Turismo already looks to be broken by the inclusion, for the first time in the series, of microtransactions in GT6, and it's a trend that's set to continue well into the next generation of games. It's one that will carry on, as well, until companies realise it's a disrespectful, dishonest practice...
    Care to cast some light on your sudden change of heart? Or, if there's no pay-or-grind mechanic, can you tell us why and how that's the case, if seasonals are paying less?

    Ta.
    Reply +12
  • Inside the toy box

  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @StooMonster

    Too true. Give us a job and a bit of money and look what happens...

    Bastards.
    Reply 0
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    Bloody hell...

    Skylanders Giants - Starter Pack - 33.99
    Triple Character Pack (Chill, Zook, Ignitor) - 31.47
    Triple Character Pack (Eruptor, Stealth Elf, Terrafin) - 17.75
    Triple Character Pack (Flashwing, Gill Grunt, Double Trouble) - 17.78
    Triple Character Pack (Pop Fizz, Tiger Happy, Whirlwind) - 17.81
    Triple Character Pack (Prism Break, Lightning Rod, Drill Sergeant) - 15.85
    Triple Character Pack (Sprocket, Sonic Boom, Stump Smash) - 17.36
    Character Pack - Crusher - 11.80
    Character Pack - Eye Brawl - 12.95
    Character Pack - Swarm - 7.03
    Character Pack - Hot Head - 12.95
    Character Pack - Thumpback - 12.95

    Total (without bargains, if your kid wants the lot): 209.69

    Then, a few weeks later: "Nah, bored of Skylanders."
    Reply 0
  • Leisure Suit Larry Reloaded review

  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @SamNunn92

    Even though you've qualified some of your terms, you're essentially saying the same things.

    as balanced a view as possible
    - is as impossible as "unbiased journalism".

    understanding who the game is made for and whether those people would enjoy it
    Ask yourself - who is the target audience? Have you met all of them? Can you read their minds? Can you predict what they'll enjoy? Should a reviewer be expected to do all those impossible things? And yet still stay "balanced" and "unbiased" and "objective"?

    my review would be useless as it gives no indication whether said (football) game was a good entry within the genre
    Don't sell yourself short. Your review would tell us what a non-football fan thought of a football game. What if you enjoyed it? What if a complete newbie outsider's perspective is actually useful?
    Reply +2
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    Jesus wept. This is getting better by the day.

    Even though this first point is a complete fucking sidetrack, let's get it out of the way. Because that's not how it went. Not even close, mate.

    Wot I sed: Eurogamer might be giving games with sexist content to Ellie because they realise that a woman is better placed to speak on the subject of male sexism.

    Wot you sed: Eurogamer are giving these games to Ellie because they're "trolling" us, and being "sexist", and you're fed up with hearing about sexism.

    Are you seriously suggesting those two points are the same? Please tell me you're not being that disingenuous.

    And now - fucking hell - you're saying Ellie should be hived off in her own little section? Swept under the carpet, much? Silenced, much?

    You say you think sexism is a problem, and I believe you. But that's also, clearly, as far as it goes for you.

    Because your main point, regardless of the who-gives-what-to-whom-and-why sideshow, is still exactly the same. You've just said it again. Explicitly. No extrapolation required.

    You want Ellie to shut the fuck up, and go off where no one will read her.

    How can you possibly justify that, if you think sexism is a problem?
    Reply +2
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @MrTomFTW

    Sometimes I don't know how you put up with these people. Surely not all of them are this dumb, all of the time. Right?
    Reply +1
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @SamNunn92

    unbiased piece of journalism
    Such a thing has never existed. Anywhere, ever. Stop expecting it.

    reviewed objectively
    Not humanly possible. What you mean to say is "reviewed in a way that I don't find offensive".

    reviewed... with the target audience in mind
    That's called "marketing".

    clear bias
    A sin that we all commit. Everyone. Including you.
    Reply 0
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @TarickStonefire

    Nothing wrong with that.

    I just find the way she does it completely unworthy of a place on this site.
    Heh. You say that like Eurogamer is the New York Times... but yeah, different publications, different strokes.

    Personally, I usually get a better sense of a game from her reviews - rants or not - than I do from some tedious-but-accurate checklist of features and systems - what some of the more critically-challenged people around these parts would call an "objective review", or, to put it less euphemistically, "a review I agree with".

    I'd rather read a reviewer with an identifiable opinion, with a voice, than some bucket of bland mush written in fear of actually committing to something, or of offending someone. Even if you disagree, it gives you a datum line; something to work from.

    I reckon at least half the fury on gaming sites is because people look to their reviews for an affirmation of their own beliefs, which doesn't exactly speak well of how securely they hold them.

    But... that's just, like, my opinion, man.
    Reply 0
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @funkateer

    This game never intended to be an argument in any political issue; the only purpose there was to be silly and funny.
    How d'you know that? Did you create it?
    Reply 0
  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    Much as debating lists is fucking tedious, I did start it (or maybe Ellie did, or maybe you did) - but only the first four, or maybe five, fit your criterion of sexist-games-given-to-Ellie-because-EG-knows-she'll-grind-her-teeth-because-reasons. Tomb Raider and Enslaved got an 8 (so no trolling there - what's Enslaved even doing on that list? Oh yeah. She mentioned Trip being hot, which presumably made you grind your teeth). P&P, meanwhile, got 3 more for being shit than for being aimed at women... WET got a seven, and so on.

    Has it occurred to you that maybe - just maybe - Eurogamer gives some of those games to Ellie because they think that a woman might be better qualified to talk about male sexism than a Donlan or a Welsh? What with Ellie, y'know, actually belonging to the gender that experiences it? It's a crazy theory, but it might just be true.

    But no. You said you don't like Ellie objecting to all that sexist content, and Eurogamer should make it stop. As if that demand weren't completely absurd.

    D'you think racist content should only be reviewed by people who don't object to it? By people who are polite enough to gloss over it? By people who don't get pissed off about it?

    No. Of course you don't. Because that would be both stupid and racist.

    So why would you rather read a reviewer who, unlike Ellie, doesn't object to any sexist content? You said yourself you don't like hearing about it, so why would you rather EG gave it to someone - not an uppity woman like Ellie, but someone more soothing and docile, who didn't make such a fuss about it, and just swept it quietly back under the rug?

    It's not as if you don't think sexism is a problem. If that were the case, all of Ellie's articles about it wouldn't make you feel so fucking uncomfortable.

    Then again, maybe you don't.

    So which is it? You don't think sexism is a problem, so Ellie should shut up about it? Or you think sexism is a problem, but you don't like hearing about it?
    Reply +2
  • GhostPig 21/07/2013

    @Tomahawk

    Wait... ad hominems? After all those wide open goals I left for you to take a punt at?

    Come on, mate, you're not even trying. You could have pointed at any number of instances of harrassment and ostracism by radical feminists towards moderates like Erin Pizzey and Warren Farrell. You could have remarked on the relatively small number of conservative voices in the arts, both in the UK and, to a lesser extent, in the US.

    You could even have pointed out that the explosion of mobile and tablet platforms has changed the demographics of gaming permanently, away from the so-called "hardcore" gaming conservatism of military shooters and space marines, towards more bland and inoffensive (i.e. politically neutral) content - in other words, the "political correctness" of common usage, not least because of Apple's puritannical jackboot kicking all the fun out of the App Store.

    But no. You had to attack me instead - which is fine, because, heh, internet - but... fucking hell, dude, that was weak. Even by Eurogamer standards.

    Pull your socks up, eh? It's kind of embarrassing when the other side has to help you out.
    Reply +2
  • GhostPig 20/07/2013

    @Tomahawk

    So, to summarise:

    "I don't have a victim complex. Now please read these three paragraphs that describe the imaginary ways in which me and my favourite art form are being persecuted."

    Son, whatever Daily Mail/Fox News fright fantasy has got you going, no one is burning any books. No one is driving macho space marines out of the business, because they make money. No one is about to ban dick jokes. No one in this New Media World Order of Games Illuminati (I paraphrase, but not by much) is discrediting anything, because frankly they're just not that sophisticated, and even if they are they're too busy trying to make games and possibly some money, if they're lucky.

    Just because someone is critical of a game you love doesn't mean you and it are suddenly in an existential fight for survival, because that would be childish and melodramatic. It just means they don't like it.

    And, while we're on the subject of the blindingly fucking obvious, something being "politically incorrect", whatever that straw man means, doesn't make it art. It just makes it "politically incorrect". Whatever that straw man means.

    Don't ask me what it means. I don't have a clue. It was invented by the political right, to make people like you all frightened and shit. So frightened you go around making wild claims about people burning books, and destroying stuff.

    The only silver lining in all of this is the utterly fucking hilarious fact that you think all of that persecution bullshit is real. Thanks for the giggle, mate.
    Reply -3
  • GhostPig 20/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    Man, getting negged in these comments is a fucking compliment.

    And "wearing that special white armour"? While complaining yourself about patronising ad hominems? Why, you naughty little hypocrite.

    But anyway.

    You still haven't answered the question - you just dodged it. Who would you have chosen to review this game instead - without gender being a factor?

    Or perhaps can't you answer, because what you're asking Eurogamer to do is absolutely impossible, and you know it. Not only impossible, but both pointless and disingenuous.

    Still, you get to call them trolls, and get to snipe at their reviewer, eh? (And all without crossing that invisible line.)

    And since you've moved your goalposts again: what, exactly, is wrong with Ellie covering games-that-might-have-sexist-content? And by those games, I assume you mean something other than Tokyo Jungle, Epic Mickey, Angry Birds Star Wars HD, Spelunky, and Wordament (and the rest) which somewhat undermine your point by having nothing whatsoever to do with sexism in videogames. In fact, the only two recent games she's covered which deal with that kind of thing are The Last of Us and Tomb Raider. And now LSL.

    Three out of everything? My God what a flood!

    So that line of argument is obviously bullshit as well.

    C'mon, son. Admit it. You just don't like people talking about sexism in games because it disturbs your mental peace and quiet, doesn't it?
    Reply -3
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @darkmorgado

    Heh.

    The irony is that the same people defending this game are the same people who flood THOSE threads defending that bollocks too.
    Macho... bromance... "He's probably gay"... right wing... military...

    Ah, denial.
    Reply +1
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    Aww. So @SpaceMidget75 took his toys and went home. This comment thread just isn't the same without him dodging the question, without him holding Eurogamer to standards he can't maintain himself, without his mangled logic, and - we're left to assume - not having the courage to admit that what really rustles his jimmies is that Ellie has the brass neck to be a woman and voice an opinion about sexism, repeatedly and in public no less. For shame! Reply -4
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    So wait... you don't care who reviews it... except if it's Ellie, because Ellie is EG's go-to when anything potentially sexist arises, which is a bad thing because... reasons. (What, because Ellie doesn't like sexism, to say which is obviously only ever clickbait, or something?) But then she's only chosen because of her gender, or because EG are trolling us, (presumably regardless of her gender, because otherwise it would be gender, or maybe it's both, right?).

    Seriously, man, jump out from under all that mangled reasoning and tell us what's really eating you.
    Reply -2
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @RawShark

    What's happening? Well. It turns out that Ellie is a radfem troll, that her entire piece is clickbait, and apparently there is a thing - which actually exists - called an "objective review"...

    What else? Pretty much everyone's gone full retard; the sun is shining, and nothing's changed.
    Reply -5
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    I keep asking because you keep dodging the question, matey.

    Simple question: who would you choose to review it instead of Ellie?

    Who?

    No doubt you can explain how your choice was completely gender-neutral. How their gender wasn't a factor.

    Off you go. Practice some of that persistent preaching of yours.
    Reply -9
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @darkmorgado

    Careful now. That review was written by Notorious Feminist Sympathiser John Walker.

    Shouldn't you have linked to a review written by someone who'd really appreciate its content - and also who wasn't chosen on the basis of his gender?

    Feelings, mate. Feelings. People around here have them, and they're vewy, vewy sensitive.
    Reply -1
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @Tomahawk

    My dear chap, posting a mugshot of the divine Richard Littlejohn was rebuffing your remarks. Too subtle? Sadly so.

    Anyway, tell us more about your victim complex. Exactly how are all these "new journalistic" people censoring you?
    Reply -2
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @Retroid

    Shit! Sorry. My mistake.
    Reply -5
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @Der_tolle_Emil

    Good God, man. There's no call for that kind of reasoned argument around here.

    Don't you know Ellie is a clickbaiting fem-troll? And we're not falling for the clickbait, because we're all writing hundreds of comments about how it's all clickbait.

    There.
    Reply -4
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @Tomahawk

    Well, I done another search, and I found the reviewer you're talking about mate - a man who can truly give this game the "fair shake", as you say, that it really deserves. He's fair and impartial, right, and he'll totally appreciate this game's content, just like your good ladyfriend. And also he'll be totally objective, yeah? So you'll get facts, not opinions. Facts you can agree with, mate.

    Laaavly.

    Reply -3
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    So who would you have chosen instead?
    Reply -4
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @SpaceMidget75

    Multiple choice! By "get an alternative view" do you mean EG should get one from:

    a) anyone who disagrees with Ellie,

    or:

    b) someone who agrees with Ellie but isn't Ellie,

    or:

    c) someone who isn't a woman?
    Reply +4
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    To all the people complaining about Ellie's review, or about her being the reviewer - I've found the one person who can give a fair and balanced opinion:

    Reply +40
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @bobfish09

    surely the reviewer should be someone who would enjoy the game if it was good
    Yeah, but Andrew Dice Clay was busy.
    Reply +14
  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @arcam Vice-versa, more like. Reply -1
  • Ending review

  • GhostPig 22/07/2013

    It's a superb game. Reply +2
  • Xbox One pre-orders trending ahead of Xbox 360 pre-orders

  • GhostPig 19/07/2013

    @Teamallstar

    ...$30 billion that is staggering. That figure is after tax...
    Before you get too excited, operating income is before tax.
    Reply +3
  • Ex-Battlefield 3 dev on quitting DICE and his role in that Easter egg

  • GhostPig 18/07/2013

    @ghostgate2001 Here's what you do:

    Click the back button in your browser.

    Scroll down to yesterday's articles (17th July).

    Click on this article: Ridiculously well-hidden Battlefield 3 Easter egg discovered.

    HTH.
    Reply +1
  • Apple mulls $280m bid for Kinect motion-sensor firm - report

  • GhostPig 16/07/2013

    @FiReTiGeR2K As long as it doesn't involve those three shells... Reply +4
  • GhostPig 16/07/2013

    @cyacomini That explains it. Cheers. Reply +1
  • GhostPig 16/07/2013

    I'm no IP or patent lawyer, but doesn't that raise the rather hilarious prospect of Apple then licensing the Kinect tech back to Microsoft for the Xbox One?

    (Unless of course Microsoft had an uncharacteristic attack of common sense back in the day, and bought it outright.)
    Reply +2
  • How Plants vs. Zombies 2 works as a free-to-play game so far

  • GhostPig 15/07/2013

    Not to be generally prejudiced against F2P, but:

    a handful of specific plant types are kept behind a micro-transaction paywall ... like the Squash, the Snow Pea and the Jalapeno

    or [you] can pay a couple of real-world dollars to advance instead

    new recruits include a Power Lily ... (you'll need to spend real-world cash to unlock this guy)
    - those are three reasons this game can absolutely fuck the fuck off.
    Reply +11
  • American McGee cancels failing OZombie Kickstarter

  • GhostPig 15/07/2013

    @mr_bez @DreadedWalrus

    You're both doing the work of the righteous and the just.
    Reply +5
  • No major updates for Tribes Ascend in the next six months

  • GhostPig 12/07/2013

    Well that's not the only thing Reddit is griping about. Privacy violations as well. Apparently. Reply +2
  • Microsoft is retiring its Xbox Live Rewards program

  • GhostPig 12/07/2013

    @Machiavellian Yeah, I'd pay not to work in customer service. I know anecdotes don't mean anything, but those red rings are just my own personal experience. Sony hardware goes wrong too; it just hasn't gone wrong for me. Friends of mine are still on their first 360, and others have had YLODs. Luck of the draw.

    For me it's not just the hardware, it's the whole experience. Everything on Xbox seems to cost a bit extra here, and a bit more there. Whether it's 100 for a measly 120GB hard disk, or another 10 for a custom cable, or 40 in return for basically fuck-all on Live, it always felt like you were constantly having to swat their hand away from your wallet.

    Rewards were just more of the same tight-fisted-but-sticky-fingered bullshit. It's almost as if Microsoft invented microtransactions before F2P was a twinkle in Mark Pincus' eye.

    Mattrick should feel right at home.
    Reply +2
  • GhostPig 11/07/2013

    @Syrette
    But I really feel that people look for and assume the absolute worst when it comes to Microsoft
    I used to feel the same way, until I was on my third red ring, and my fiftieth call to Xbox customer "service". And then I became one of those people. Although it was at least from actual and unpleasant experience.

    Whatever good ideas Xbox have come up with over the years, I don't think Rewards counts as one of them.
    Reply +9
  • Windows chief confirmed as new Xbox boss

  • GhostPig 11/07/2013

    @FortysixterUK Cool down, son.

    It doesn't mean what you think it means.
    Reply +3
  • GhostPig 11/07/2013

    This is the most bizarrely predictable and fucked-up comment thread I've seen on here in a while. Well done everybody.

    Anyway, back on topic, allthingsd have more details about the whole Microsoft restructuring. This bit caught my eye:

    Windows Phone head Terry Myerson will head OS, which includes the flagship Windows, as well as Xbox software and systems; Windows co-head Julie Larson-Green will be in charge of all hardware development, including Surface and Xbox, as well as all games, music, video and other entertainment
    And that's the confusing part. Xbox is now split. It has its software and systems in one division, and its hardware and whatever constitutes "games, music, video and other entertainment" in another.

    Does that mean those very unlovely music and video apps will be under Xbox's control? Or is the new Larson-Green empire simply going to be handed a Xbox-customised version of Windows 8, complete with store and other apps, and told to fill it with content?

    It's a fucking weird decision, anyway. But also highly amusing that Ballmer is trying to turn Microsoft into Apple + Software-as-a-service.
    Reply 0
  • The Last of Us isn't the solution to sexism in games, but it's a start

  • GhostPig 05/07/2013

    At least two people here have got all furious about that Gamespot article - this one - but anyone who doesn't instantly sprain a bollock at the mere mention of the word "performativity" can see that it argues pretty much the same thing as Suellentrop and what Keef Stuart said over at the Grauniad. In short, Joel is still a conventional hero, is still given a mission (Campbell's good old call-to-adventure), and so on.

    All four of these articles are making the same point: TLOU is a huge step forward (Ellie's characterisation) but it's also traditional (Joel's adventure as the protagonist). They're asking for a balanced judgement, before we get carried away with extravagant praise for properties that it may not actually possess.

    And as for any hotheads on here who think that Petit is some kind of extremist - and I'm looking at you, @Devils-DIVISION - there's this:

    There's nothing wrong with stories about men, and how they are changed by the things they go through.
    There's not a radical feminist on the fucking planet who'd be caught dead saying that. Just a thought.
    Reply 0