Your take on Nintendo DS reviews?

[THATinkjar]

Being an avid gamer and collector, I have been lying awake at night a little of late, thinking about the Nintendo DS. I very much love this little platform (as you may already know), and while it is certainly doing very well at retail, I am forever reading poor review after poor review, and often for games that us DS gamers have been greatly anticipating.

Make no mistake, the DS is unfortunately home to some appalling games. The standard of these awful games is a significantly lower standard than that of most other platforms.

But, scanning through Gamerankings, you can see a number of key games receiving rather average scores. Games such as Mr. Driller, Age of Empires, Bomberman and Super Princess Peach. I would recommend all of these games for those with a DS, and I think they're all brilliant. But the reviews have been rather negative, as a whole, as they have been with Worms, Super Monkey Ball and Resident Evil DS to name another three.

While I haven't as yet played Worms on the DS, I would rate every single game above a lot higher than the reviews have. Yes, Resident Evil DS may be a port of a ten year old game, and yes in comparison to Resident Evil 4 it clearly isn't the better game, but on its own merits - it is excellent.

I can't help but feel that reviewers are comparing DS games to their console counterparts a little too often, and not judging them on their own merits. Yes, Super Monkey Ball DS lost some of our favourite mini games in the translation process. Big whoop, should we mark it down because of this?

What disturbs me most, though, is that I've really been enjoying these games, and if I had listened to the reviews, I wouldn't be. And according to the reviews, I shouldn't be liking them as much as I do. Something is clearly wrong here, me thinks.

WarioWare: Touched is as another example. I freakin' love this game. I haven't played the GBA games in the series, and while this game could have been better (more games, etc), as it stands I would rate this game very highly. In terms of fun factor alone, it is a certain ten out of ten for me. And fun is the reason the DS has captivated as much as it has. I just wish the reviews would recognise this.

I have to be honest, I'm not too sure where I am heading with this thread. There are two trains of thought, here... 1) The lack of genuinely brilliant third party games for the DS, and 2) The reviews of DS games, which I believe should place more emphasis on the fun factor, rather than marking the games down for not pushing the system's unique features or comparing favourably to the PSP or console versions.

No doubt, the DS is home to a number of games that *could* have been released on the GBA. Does that make these games not worth getting? For me, not in the slightest. I'll have almost fifty games for the DS by the end of the week, and I can only count six which I bought merely for collection purposes, and I wouldn't ordinarily touch (Ping Pals, Need for Speed, etc).

Incidentally, this thinking can also be applied to the PSP. I *prefer* to buy the PSP versions of games appearing on the PS2 and Xbox. Okay, they're quite often not as good, I'm sure, but I enjoy them a lot more.

Your thoughts?

[n8littlefield]

I completely agree with you. My prime example is Battles of Prince of Persia. While there were some very well done reviews (Gameinformer, believe it or not), the game was consistently bashed for it's graphics not being amazing.

The game is the most indepth turnbased strategy available on the handheld by far. There is more strategy than Advance Wars, but because it is not amazing to look at it got beat up in reviews. I've heard that Monkey Ball was actually quite good, but like you said, the reviews were very negative in general.

I've started basically using reviews as a source of screenshots and videos and relying entirely on word of mouth for DS reviews (if I hadn't, I never would have got Battles of Prince of Persia and missed one of my favorate games for the system!)

[klausien]

I also agree. It is very strange that Game Informer has had the fairest DS reviews. I think the editors there are actually genuinely fans of the system. Super Princess Peach was well reviewed and I also give it a huge recommendation. It really is a great Mario game. New Super Mario Bros. is going to be awesome.

Actually, looking a what I am most anticipating this year, the DS is in the lead. 2D gaming is alive and well.

[THATinkjar]

Thank you for your reply, n8littlefield. I'm not going completely insane, then :D

Battles of POP is a game that very much interests me, but it is BECAUSE of the reviews (which have less than stellar, as you said), I haven't picked this up. But I'm sure it is just like every other DS game that hasn't scored well but I've enjoyed a great deal. It is only £17.99 on Play.com, so I might pick this up soon.

[Sega_Seller]

Well I have a PSP and a DS. On my current trip I decided to bring my DS instead of my PSP and let me tell you in what the best decision I've made.

I love my DS! I originally bought the DS for Nintendogs but I've played my copy once for about 10 mins. I love the games like Trauma Center, Phoenix Wright, Advance Wars, and Warioware. The DS has games that are fun and require strategy. Where the PSP has the basic platformers and shooters, which are nothing special. Another thing I like about the DS games is that it has no load times like the PSP. Also the majority of the DS games you can just pick up and play for a few mins where the PSP games require a dedication of lots of time.

I really do not know why critics do not like the DS it is a great system.

[n8littlefield]

Battles of Prince of Persia is a great game for fans of the genre. It's not going to sell someone on turn-based strategy, but for those that already like them, it's a really well done.

While the graphics are pretty weak (the icons for some units are similar to the point that at first you could confuse them), the new stuff they do is worth the learning curve. There is splash damage to surrounding units when you use missile weapons, the direction your unit is facing affects their use in battle, units can become demoralized to the point that they run off the battle field, and if you're cornered and attacked you'll take extra damage. It's just a really indepth game, more similar to an old PC game than a console game.

I love my DS, I would actually give up any of my consoles before I'd give up my DS. It's very odd (given the Paper Mario review thing) that Gameinformer really is the best source for reviews for it...

[chrisbid]

honestly, reviews do very little to sway sales. critically acclaimed titles rarely do well, and critical duds often sell well

[THATinkjar]

honestly, reviews do very little to sway sales. critically acclaimed titles rarely do well, and critical duds often sell well

Does this say more about the reviews than the people buying the games? Or visa versa?

[chrisbid]

i think it says the industry thrives on casual gamers now more than ever. as lousy as shadow the hedgehog was, im sure it near the top of segas selling charts. Sonic is a name that earned a repuation with great games back on the Genesis. casual gamers (and a lot of parents that buy games for their kids) dont read reviews and do not eat, breathe, sleep the industry.

the DS is working its way into this segment of the market, as a successor to the GBA.

[n8littlefield]

honestly, reviews do very little to sway sales. critically acclaimed titles rarely do well, and critical duds often sell well

I disagree. For the most part, the high reviewed games do sell quite well. I just checked IGN for PS2 games (since the DS library is still relatively small) and with few exceptions (like Beyond Good and Evil, ICO, or some RPGs) it seems that the big titles get the big scores - and likely more advertising, more magazine covers, etc.

The duds that sell well are often because of other reasons, for example they might be based on a hit movie (Matrix) or based on a theme that wouldn't review well, but has a large audience (hunting and fishing come to mind).

Reviews can influence sales, especially on titles like Battles of Prince of Persia or Monkeyball which aren't considered in the MUST BUY library for that system, like Mario Kart or Castlevania.

[JWKobayashi]

I've also been thinking about this lately, mainly due to the rather average scores that Super Princess Peach received.

I too, love the DS... it's currently the system that I play the most. And yes, while the system does have it's fair share of stinkers, it also has a stream of quality games coming out. The games don't have to all be technical marvels... they just have to be fun. Thats what games should be about, and thats what the DS excels at.


One thing that annoys me is the gripe about use of the touch screen. I've seen several reviews that complain that it's used poorly or for a glorified map. Nintendo put the 2nd screen on the thing for whatever the developer wants to use it for. There is no rule that says every game has to have touch screen capabilities. If it makes sense within the context of the game, by all means it should be used. But just tacking it on as an afterthought because reviewers say that it should be used is bull.

[chrisbid]

Reviews can influence sales, especially on titles like Battles of Prince of Persia or Monkeyball which aren't considered in the MUST BUY library for that system, like Mario Kart or Castlevania.

games like psychonauts and prince of persia got great reviews and sold like crap. even stuff like Katamari Damacy which most people here enjoy didnt do that well compared to your typical top 20 titles

there is obviously some influence, but a great review will never push a game to mainstream success, word of mouth to get the name out to casual gamers is the most important influence on sales

[le geek]

I think most reviews are slanted a bit for John Q gamer, which would be the generic Xbox/PS2 crowd. So DS reviews that don't have wide appeal are going to have slightly lower reviews. But not by that much...

Metacritic (of games I own or owned):
Electroplankton 72
Pac 'n Roll 71
Sprung 48

I would give Electroplankton 85, Pac 'n Roll 85 and Sprung 60

Urbz: Sims in the City 67
Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow 89

I would rate these two game five point higher each, but it's pretty close.

Feel the Magic XX/XY 75
Polarium 74
Yoshi's Touch and Go 73
Zoo Keeper 74

I think the above are about spot on really...

Super Mario DS 85

and I think Super Mario DS is actually a 75, because of the difficulty of simulating analogue with the touch screen...


retro compliations are much more slanted IMO:

From Metacritc:
Tatio Legends 74
Sega Classics Collection 49

I would give Taito Legends 85 and I would give Sega Classics Collection 75.


It's all about learning to read reviews. If you like the concept and the reviews say it's well produced but not for everyone, you'll probably enjoy it.
[Example Dig Dug: Digging Strike]

If you like the concept and the review says, it could be fun but the controls are messed up (or the code is spotty), then you might want to wait for cheap or pass on it.
[Example Worms DS]

Cheers,
Ben

[n8littlefield]

I think the issue is also that the larger review sites have to review a ton of games, and the smaller releases for the handhelds probably don't get nearly as much time for reviews.

Looking at metacritic for BoPoP, for example, one review states it's a bad card-battling game, which is completely inaccurate as it is a turnbased strategy primarily. Just because a card appears, doesn't make it YugiOh. I mean, at least play the game a little. All the positive reviews say "once you get past the exterior" all the negative reviews seemed to have not gotten that far!

[unwinddesign]

Welcome to the grand big ol' world, where not everyone's opinion is the same as yours. And, believe it or not, I think the majority of people really aren't that enthralled by "omg wtf look it is different!11" etc. For better or for worse, most people want to play Mario instead of something like Princess Peach.

[n8littlefield]

Welcome to the grand big ol' world, where not everyone's opinion is the same as yours. And, believe it or not, I think the majority of people really aren't that enthralled by "omg wtf look it is different!11" etc. For better or for worse, most people want to play Mario instead of something like Princess Peach.

That's not the point at all with what we've been posting about. The issue that most of us were referring to is the simple fact that MANY DS games seem to be receiving mediocre reviews (Princess Peach, Battles of Prince Persia, Monkeyball, Yoshi T&G) but yet are very good games and get very good word of mouth from actual gamers.

If I like a game others don't, fine. If I hate a game that most people love, fine. But when every non-reviewer seems to really like a game, but the general reviews come in lower than that - it does seem a bit odd. If a game is great - it shouldn't matter if it is a Princess Peach game or a Mario game - quality is quality.

And guess what? The DS audience in fact IS enthralled by "OMG WTF LOOK IT IS DIFFERENT!" - games like Trauma Center, Pheonix Wright, and Nintendogs pretty well prove that. Look at how many people have imported Ouenden as well. The DS is the system for new/unique experiences and it seems like many reviewers don't really have a grasp on that yet.

[petewhitley]

One thing that annoys me is the gripe about use of the touch screen. I've seen several reviews that complain that it's used poorly or for a glorified map. Nintendo put the 2nd screen on the thing for whatever the developer wants to use it for. There is no rule that says every game has to have touch screen capabilities. If it makes sense within the context of the game, by all means it should be used. But just tacking it on as an afterthought because reviewers say that it should be used is bull.


But the thing is, for many games which don't use the touchscreen, it's realitively easy for a lot of us to imagine innovative ways it could have been used. If a developer fails to capitalize on that second screen when it could have been put to good use (which is quite honestly most cases), it's just wasted potential, not to mention neglecting the very thing that is the DS's strength (cause it sure ain't processing power or media capacity). Games that just throw a map on the touch screen reek of laziness and rush-job by the very omission.

[chrisbid]

I think most reviews are slanted a bit for John Q gamer, which would be the generic Xbox/PS2 crowd. So DS reviews that don't have wide appeal are going to have slightly lower reviews. But not by that much...

Metacritic (of games I own or owned):
Electroplankton 72
Pac 'n Roll 71
Sprung 48

I would give Electroplankton 85, Pac 'n Roll 85 and Sprung 60

Urbz: Sims in the City 67
Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow 89

I would rate these two game five point higher each, but it's pretty close.

Feel the Magic XX/XY 75
Polarium 74
Yoshi's Touch and Go 73
Zoo Keeper 74

I think the above are about spot on really...

Super Mario DS 85

and I think Super Mario DS is actually a 75, because of the difficulty of simulating analogue with the touch screen...


retro compliations are much more slanted IMO:

From Metacritc:
Tatio Legends 74
Sega Classics Collection 49

I would give Taito Legends 85 and I would give Sega Classics Collection 75.


It's all about learning to read reviews. If you like the concept and the reviews say it's well produced but not for everyone, you'll probably enjoy it.
[Example Dig Dug: Digging Strike]

If you like the concept and the review says, it could be fun but the controls are messed up (or the code is spotty), then you might want to wait for cheap or pass on it.
[Example Worms DS]

Cheers,
Ben



man oh man, here goes the 100 point/10 point/5 point scale debate again, you totally pulled those numbers out of thin air

[Rockman Neo]

man oh man, here goes the 100 point/10 point/5 point scale debate again, you totally pulled those numbers out of thin air

I just round everything to a 10 point scale. To me, an 85 out of 100 is an 8.5 out of 10. And a 3.5 out 5 is a 7 out of 10. May not be completely accurate, but it works.

Unfortunately, some sites use inane 7 and 94 point scales. The sites that use those actual scales won't be mentioned. THere is also the issue with adding random numbers at the right of a decimal point (in the use of a 10 point scale). Personally, I think any numbers other than 0 or 5 after a decimal point, at least in terms of scoring, are quite redundant.

GameSpot Reviewer: ZOMG I I WIL SCOR DIS EGAM A 8.1 B/C IT IZ SLITLY BETAR DAN A 8 WUT A NEDLES DETAL!11one!

[Gamereviewgod]

People seem to forget that the mainstream gaming media will be reviewing for the maintream gaming crowd for the most part. There are always exceptions.

I have all sorts of whack job theories about how this type of thing should be handled, but I agree with many of the reviews, especially Yoshi Touch and Go, which I hated with a passion.

If you enjoyed them, great. Keep enjoying them. However, using EGM as an example and only an example, this isn't exactly the style of game their target readership is going to enjoy, especially given the amount of issues with it. The review will be skewed because of it everytime.

The latest Madden however, well, that will almost always land a 9. It's a matter of figuring out what games you like, find a site/writer you agree with a lot, and stick with them. I disagree with the whole Gamerankings/Metacritic thing. You're only seeing scores, not the reasons for it. You may get a variety of scores, but you don't know why.

[le geek]

man oh man, here goes the 100 point/10 point/5 point scale debate again, you totally pulled those numbers out of thin air

Dude,

I normally review games on a 5 point scale. I just converted it the 100 point scale, to match the metacritic stuff. The scale was besides the point, and I didn't mean to come across as a nut job.

Anyway my point was that I think DS reviews are a little off compared to my opinion, but not off by that much. And that classic compilations almost always get low reviews.

Everyone who comes to DP on a regular basis isn't the typical gamer, because we keep the old stuff we like too. So if you want to to get a good idea of if a game is for you based on reviews, you should learn how to read them differently. Or don't, it's just a suggestion...

If we're upset that the DS isn't getting the reviews it deserves in the US, now that's just silly. :)

Cheers,
Ben

[§ Gideon §]

Eventually, you'll realize that ratings are an attempt to quantify the unquantifiable, and that you shouldn't ascribe so much importance to them. If anything, ratings are a gage for how deep a particular publication is in a particular publisher's pocket.

[THATinkjar]

If we're upset that the DS isn't getting the reviews it deserves in the US, now that's just silly.

This isn't the Nintendo fanboy in me talking, now... but I *am* upset. I'm sorry. Maybe I'm a little weird (OK, I am weird :D). I'm upset because the reviews can't seem to appreciate a game for what it is. They seem to concentrate on what it isn't. This bothers me.

For example: Bomberman for DS isn't anything new. It is the same game it was ten years ago. I'm not too sure if the game should be marked down because of this. Or because it makes minimal use of the touch screen or the microphone, or that it looks like a GBA game. Instead, it puts emphasis on the second screen and WiFi and the gameplay. It may recycle a lot of content, but it has brought this content to newcomers to the series.

The last Bomberman game I owned was on the SNES. For me, this game feels as fresh as ever. I just think the reviews should appreciate a little more who exactly will be buying and playing this game. Maybe I'm wrong.

[unwinddesign]

Welcome to the grand big ol' world, where not everyone's opinion is the same as yours. And, believe it or not, I think the majority of people really aren't that enthralled by "omg wtf look it is different!11" etc. For better or for worse, most people want to play Mario instead of something like Princess Peach.

That's not the point at all with what we've been posting about. The issue that most of us were referring to is the simple fact that MANY DS games seem to be receiving mediocre reviews (Princess Peach, Battles of Prince Persia, Monkeyball, Yoshi T&G) but yet are very good games and get very good word of mouth from actual gamers.

If I like a game others don't, fine. If I hate a game that most people love, fine. But when every non-reviewer seems to really like a game, but the general reviews come in lower than that - it does seem a bit odd. If a game is great - it shouldn't matter if it is a Princess Peach game or a Mario game - quality is quality.

And guess what? The DS audience in fact IS enthralled by "OMG WTF LOOK IT IS DIFFERENT!" - games like Trauma Center, Pheonix Wright, and Nintendogs pretty well prove that. Look at how many people have imported Ouenden as well. The DS is the system for new/unique experiences and it seems like many reviewers don't really have a grasp on that yet.

It's exactly what this topic is talking about.

Most review sites cater to regular people -- the people who might buy one or two games a month, play them, trade them in etc. They don't cater to the hardcore. DigitalPress is *a lot* different than the "real world" game market. Gamespot, EGM etc. have to take into account whether John X gamer wants to play Z game. Phoenix Wright and Trauma Center both sold decently and got respectable reviews. However, you won't see the press give them 9.0 on a regular basis, nor will you see them break the 1 million + sales mark. Coincedence? Not really. How many adverts did you see in EGM for Phoenix Wright or Trauma Center? Hmm...


It's really about the bottom line here. Disregarding the fact that the reviewers *gasp* might not be that enthralled with the DS (I never was), it's clear that advertising/revenue blah etc. have a huge effect on the type of scores given.

Thing is, I doubt that most "non reviewers" love all these DS games supposedly getting "panned." Yes, Princess Peach is ok. But the scores of 75% or so reflect that it is a short game, rather easy, and not as good as a typical Mario platformer. Gamer X will probably like this game, but should probably rent instead of buy. That way, Gamer X will continue to buy publication Y, advertisers will continue to advertise in pub Y, and pub Y continues on down the road of happiness and reviewing games.

Regardless, if you love a game, it really shouldn't matter what type of reviews it gets. I just think that people around here forget that DP is oftentimes not representative of the rest of the market's opinion.

[Poofta!]

Welcome to the grand big ol' world, where not everyone's opinion is the same as yours. And, believe it or not, I think the majority of people really aren't that enthralled by "omg wtf look it is different!11" etc. For better or for worse, most people want to play Mario instead of something like Princess Peach.

That's not the point at all with what we've been posting about. The issue that most of us were referring to is the simple fact that MANY DS games seem to be receiving mediocre reviews (Princess Peach, Battles of Prince Persia, Monkeyball, Yoshi T&G) but yet are very good games and get very good word of mouth from actual gamers.

If I like a game others don't, fine. If I hate a game that most people love, fine. But when every non-reviewer seems to really like a game, but the general reviews come in lower than that - it does seem a bit odd. If a game is great - it shouldn't matter if it is a Princess Peach game or a Mario game - quality is quality.

And guess what? The DS audience in fact IS enthralled by "OMG WTF LOOK IT IS DIFFERENT!" - games like Trauma Center, Pheonix Wright, and Nintendogs pretty well prove that. Look at how many people have imported Ouenden as well. The DS is the system for new/unique experiences and it seems like many reviewers don't really have a grasp on that yet.

It's exactly what this topic is talking about.

Most review sites cater to regular people -- the people who might buy one or two games a month, play them, trade them in etc. They don't cater to the hardcore. DigitalPress is *a lot* different than the "real world" game market. Gamespot, EGM etc. have to take into account whether John X gamer wants to play Z game. Phoenix Wright and Trauma Center both sold decently and got respectable reviews. However, you won't see the press give them 9.0 on a regular basis, nor will you see them break the 1 million + sales mark. Coincedence? Not really. How many adverts did you see in EGM for Phoenix Wright or Trauma Center? Hmm...


It's really about the bottom line here. Disregarding the fact that the reviewers *gasp* might not be that enthralled with the DS (I never was), it's clear that advertising/revenue blah etc. have a huge effect on the type of scores given.

Thing is, I doubt that most "non reviewers" love all these DS games supposedly getting "panned." Yes, Princess Peach is ok. But the scores of 75% or so reflect that it is a short game, rather easy, and not as good as a typical Mario platformer. Gamer X will probably like this game, but should probably rent instead of buy. That way, Gamer X will continue to buy publication Y, advertisers will continue to advertise in pub Y, and pub Y continues on down the road of happiness and reviewing games.

Regardless, if you love a game, it really shouldn't matter what type of reviews it gets. I just think that people around here forget that DP is oftentimes not representative of the rest of the market's opinion.


unwinddesign is completely right here. fact of the matter is, those games DID deserve what they got, if youre a casual gamer. if youre a DS fanboy, then of course you will be outraged and cry foul. i own a DS, and about 20 games for it, i dont really care about reviews but im in no way agreeing that those games deserved better scores. they are average-above average games, and the scores reflect that.

[Avatard]

People take reviews seriously? Boy whatever would I do without having my opinion fed too me.

If I like a game does it matter what some XBox big boy writes up about my game?

Don't worry about reviews. Bashing Nintendo is the hip thing to do. Down with the man. Go go antiestablishmentarinism! LOL

[Joker T]

I rarely go by reviews, my own intrests lead me into a purchase.

I see I'm not alone liking Battles of Prince of Persia, that game got trashed by IGN and it's easily one of my favorite games on the system.

[n8littlefield]

unwinddesign is completely right here. fact of the matter is, those games DID deserve what they got, if youre a casual gamer. if youre a DS fanboy, then of course you will be outraged and cry foul. i own a DS, and about 20 games for it, i dont really care about reviews but im in no way agreeing that those games deserved better scores. they are average-above average games, and the scores reflect that.

I say it's the opposite. I think that game reviews are written for the hardcore, more elitist gamer, and that casual gamers are generally more forgiving of faults and likely would skew many games higher (and some games lower).

For example, I would argue that for the average, casual gamer, that the length of Super Princess Peach would not be an issue. I would also argue that the graphics of Battles of Prince of Persia would not be the issue that IGN made out of it.

Who would have issues with the length of Peach or the graphics of a turnbased strategy game? Hardcore gamers. The gamers that are used to and expect, long games with amazing graphics. There are some of us who don't mind shorter games sometimes, because at least it means we can finish something!

Let me give you another example, Mario Kart DS. It got great reviews, but I, as a more casual gamer, would have in fact lowered its scores. Why? Because there are so many hardcore gamers out there that are willing to snake around every corner, and because I don't have a ton of time to enter friend codes into my DS to play non-snakers, I can't enjoy the game fully online - and the single player mode can get dull over time.

[PDorr3]

when DS games get reviewed, they are always bashed for not taking advantage of the touch screen, or 2 screens. It seems to me that if nintendo had just launched a new handheld with 1 screen (making it a touch screen or not) the reviewers would be less harsh, but having the 2 screens makes it worse on such games because the game itself isnt living up to THEIR expectation on what both screen should have been used for.

[THATinkjar]

when DS games get reviewed, they are always bashed for not taking advantage of the touch screen, or 2 screens. It seems to me that if nintendo had just launched a new handheld with 1 screen (making it a touch screen or not) the reviewers would be less harsh, but having the 2 screens makes it worse on such games because the game itself isnt living up to THEIR expectation on what both screen should have been used for.

Weren't these the same people who were perhaps "bashing" (and I realise "bashing" isn't the right word) the Nintendo DS prior to, and in the early stages of, its release?

Surely Nintendo (and some third parties) have done something right with the games (and using the handheld's unique features) to get them thinking about what could have been.

Developers (and gamers) have gotten used to a very standard way of developing (and playing) video games. It will take time for everyone to get on the same wavelength.