![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=91.7){kind=small}
I have some issues with this Wartech review. While I mostly agree with the score (the game's pretty meh), I don't agree with how it was applied. Going from the text, it seems like Matt actually did enjoy the game quite a bit, but he thinks the price tag on the game is too high. From what I can discern, the score is based less on the game's merits (or lack thereof) as it is on the game's asking price, the typical $59.99 X360 software usually retails for.
This really bothers me. While I think it's a good thing to mention price/value for money in a review's text, I don't think price should factor into the numerical score - especially in this case, since I kinda doubt Ubi had much say in pricing it. It's almost like saying a movie sucked just because you weren't able to get the matinee ticket and you were overcharged for popcorn.
Admittedly, $60 does seem a bit steep, and I do think it should be lower, but we continue to see tons of examples of people willing to pay obscene amounts of money to get certain games (some of which aren't even as good as this one). Perhaps the price is a turn-off to some, but there will always be somebody willing to pay it....
May 24 2007, 19:30:16 UTC 4 years ago
anyway after reading this i will DEFINITELY let this one hit the bargain bin before i even consider picking it up.
May 29 2007, 20:32:18 UTC 4 years ago
May 24 2007, 20:19:49 UTC 4 years ago
Complaining about the price-tag and simplicity is a little weird, but then again this comes from someone who's into simple traditional danmaku games and finds the concept of playing as a boss character in competitive online play a dream.
I still don't get the title/coverart change D:
May 24 2007, 21:20:57 UTC 4 years ago
i think matt's totally right when he says that, on PS3, it would be $20. except for the online play aspect, anyway. if that matters enough to (someone) then it's worth it.
May 24 2007, 22:45:09 UTC 4 years ago
It could have been a Dreamcast game, really, but the whole point of the port is the online play.
To be honest, it's surprising that the game made it to the US. While it's true that the PS2 receives 20$ games going by that criteria, they tend to be stripped of online play and a majority of them never even leave Japan... so in the event that someone who's interested in this game decides to spend 60$ for it... it's less expensive than importing :/
May 25 2007, 00:47:20 UTC 4 years ago
as far as the game itself goes i completely agree that it's worth the $60 price to a select audience to get the preserved online play, or to look at it in terms of the PS2 analogy, worth $40 more than the game would cost otherwise were it to make it over here on that platform.
but to the average person who won't get deep into the game, it isn't going to seem to be worth that $60 price tag. it's sort of delicate.
i have no idea the financials of this release so i can't make an educated comment about my thoughts on what price point ubi should have aimed for, but my gut feeling is $40.
May 29 2007, 20:33:20 UTC 4 years ago
Well, think of what the typical X360 player buys: Halo and Gears of War. Consider that and the title/cover change makes a lot more sense.
May 24 2007, 20:28:50 UTC 4 years ago
Senkou does come down to basic patterns, but only in Boss mode (a last resort which you only really use because it keeps you alive longer) do you actually shoot bullet-hell patterns. You can play the same kind of mind games in boss mode, but muuuch slooower. It's actually a lot weaker. The closest analog I can think of is Virtual On, which is a game where you don't so much fire at the enemy as make the enemy run into your line of fire. Of course, lock-on fire or direct point-and-shoot aiming would make the whole thing pointless. Just because it doesn't work the way the reviewer wants it to doesn't mean it's not deep or competitive:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dfxmxR6M-8E
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xv2RdM4XNg8
One of the base mixups, as illustrated in these videos, is this: either I shoot a slow, wide-arc shot that forces you to weave slowly through it, or I shoot a fast, direct laser shot that you have to dash out of the way to avoid. If you dash during the wide-arc shot, you're probably going to run into a bullet and take a little damage. If you try to move out of the way of the straight shot without dashing, you'll take big damage. The game is all made out of stuff like that and you know I love that kinda thing.
May 24 2007, 21:28:12 UTC 4 years ago
anyway, after watching that video, i'm pretty positive i don't want it. it would just linger on my shelf forever and then i'd get rid of it. i am learning to resist to buy things that are like this "just because".
all the same, i'm glad that it came out here. it's nice to see tha the 360 is established enough here that this kind of release looks viable to publishers. too bad there aren't (many?) more games like this to port...
May 25 2007, 02:04:54 UTC 4 years ago
May 25 2007, 02:39:05 UTC 4 years ago
May 29 2007, 20:35:03 UTC 4 years ago
Then again, I'm one of the few who didn't mind the US Saturn controller, so...
May 30 2007, 02:05:15 UTC 4 years ago
May 24 2007, 23:55:17 UTC 4 years ago
I disagree with your movie ticket example. Missing the matinee price isn't fair, since that is on the buyers' side. Like judging a $50 game as a $65 game because you were silly and ordered it at full price online from a site that charged both sales tax and a steep shipping&handling fee. A fairer example might be if theaters or studios decided a ticket for a two hour movie should cost 50% more than a 90 minute movie. Or that someone decided since Spider-Man 3 was expensive to make and expected to be a big hit, ticket prices for it should be doubled. In either of those cases, you probably would see ticket price become part of reviews.
Anyway, the price of a budget game tends to become a factor in reviews, and even sometimes in the score or the general "buy/don't buy" attitude. Why shouldn't "premium" pricing get similar treatment? Particularly if the reviewer feels the game doesn't measure up to its pricing status, whether it be due to plenty of extras or just a "next gen" pricing scheme. (This doesn't necessarily mean it should factor into score, but reviews seem more accepting of acknowledging the impact of a $20 or even $40 price tag on a new game than a $60 pricing.)
May 25 2007, 00:50:39 UTC 4 years ago
Anonymous
May 29 2007, 00:19:06 UTC 4 years ago
dai jou bu
Even hardcore shmuppers in Japan may not even like this game because it plays so differently from a regular shmup. Like these Japanese players, Matt fails to realize the game's influences come from Virtual On and a little bit of Psychic Force, both which are considered fighting games, not shmups. Unfortunately, all Matt says in his review is that this game sucks because it doesn't control like a shmup and makes a broad statement that this should've been an Xbox Live Arcade game without even taking into consideration that Senko no Ronde's engine had to be reworked (for all the better) to meet Microsoft's 720p standard, not to mention a whole bunch of other stuff that had to be added which would've been impossible to accomplish on XBLA's standards back when this game was released in Japan.IF this review was balanced to the hardcore crowd, he would've mentioned that this game plays more like Virtual On than a regular shmup and people need to take this into consideration or else they won't like it. However, it does not, which is my biggest beef with the entire review. This is why I like Alex Kierkegaard's review of this game because it addresses this:
http://insomnia.ac/reviews/naomi/senkono
May 29 2007, 20:45:26 UTC 4 years ago
Re: dai jou bu
That's just it, though, this isn't a review meant for the hardcore crowd. Matt even says clearly that he thinks this game has more mainstream appeal than a lot of the modern shooter offerings. He could go into the Psychic Force/VO influence, sure, but when you write a review for a major site like this, you have to consider just what percentage of the readers are going to know these titles. Both PF and VO are fairly niche offerings that even many anthusiast gamers won't be 100% familiar with.What you bring up about the engine needing to be reworked to fit into high-def is interesting. Unfortunately, that's not really commonly known information, and I doubt Matt would have had any clue that that was the case without some serious research - something that is not always possible when you're on deadline, unfortunately. (I always make a point of trying to learn as much about the background of games I review, but I have the liberty of more time in which to do so.)
Of course, this is why we have fan-run enthusiast sties - to serve reviews and news tailored for a smaller, less "mainstream" audience. :)
May 30 2007, 02:06:15 UTC 4 years ago
Re: dai jou bu
not to mention that i personally could not give a fuck what trouble g.rev had to go to, at least in terms of reviewing the game, to bring it to the 360. that's their problem, not mine.