I can’t see where this feature would be flawed, seems all pretty clear cut to me – even to the extent of folks (freely) offering up games to be listed – and indeed some were.
At the risk of spoiling my own nominations – I did opt for a clear round one misery. That said such things are subjective. To be honest, I think this just compliments the voting.
Perhaps folks sought to vote in favour of unfamiliar titles, wanting to learn more, maybe popular ones… either way, it’s up to us, our choices.
For this site / podcast staff to freely give up their spare time, contribute and share a beloved pastime with us is very welcome indeed, a pleasure (to read / listen to) in fact.
Are said staff guilty of douchebaggery? Certainly, are they some the finest writers and contributors to grace integrity? Absolutely – and to great effect.
Yep, I think Select-a-Misery is great !!
]]>When you accuse me, completely falsely, of cheating by removing games from the list, you can expect to be called out on it.
You asked a question, so should be grateful that I took the time to explain my position in detail. I’m not sure how you justifiably can be offended when the questions you ask are answered carefully and thoroughly.
But I am most surprised that you think I should silently permit you to make false accusations. If that’s what you want to do here, then it’s absolutely fine with me if you leave. Cheers.
]]>Maybe you’d have a few more comments from readers if you didn’t always feel the need to verbally destroy anyone who rubs you the wrong way. Or in this case, asks a question you don’t like. Best of luck in the future. I’ll be removing this site from my bookmark list.
]]>Clearly if you admit that there are games which are terrible primarily because they aren’t even earnest efforts to BE proper games, then you must also admit that the things that can be said about such failures, within the constraints of a review designed to evaluate games on their game-like qualities, are going to be pretty limited. So, you can’t turn around and wag your finger at me for presenting that fact to the readers in the interest of heading off a disappointment.
You write, “it’s a bit misleading to present titles that you can simply dismiss as ‘not bad by design’ or some such.”
That is absolutely untrue. Not one game on the list was invalidated for such a reason. The only reason games were not validated is because of a lack of access to the game, or because the game was not available in an authentic North American release.
You then write, I frankly would rather you just put up a select a playthrough and list things you’re actually invested in.
Again, you are conflating things. The fact that I am INVESTED in a game doesn’t make it good instead of bad. In fact, the requirement that I be INVESTED in it (whatever that means) is secondary. But it does need to be something about which reasonable critique can be offered.
My review of Deadly Towers critiques that game along expectations which we have of games. It was possible to review (and quite fun to read) for precisely that reason. Deadly Towers is a terrible game. But it is terrible PRECISELY because it is a serious effort to be a game. Mary Kate and Ashley Horse Riding is also terrible, but it is terrible in a way that presents little opportunity for commentary–not because it is a game, but because it emphatically is not really an attempt to make a game. I could play it all afternoon and have less than a paragraph worth of comment because although it is released on a game media, it is not trying to be a game in the same sense as an earnest effort.
I will not prevent–and, despite your claims to the contrary, have not prevented–people from nominating valid games, however disingenuous their game-ness is, nor will I prevent people voting for the same. But as the reviewer, who is also interested in producing something people want to read, I consider it my DUTY to save people from themselves. There are many miseries, but as I understand it the ultimate goal of this misery is that it is followed with a REVIEW that you can read. Therefore, I should encourage you to select-a-misery that will result in a good review, and not the one that will just result in me being bored in front of a TV for a few hours.
I fail to see how that is somehow ‘wrong’, nor do I understand for a moment your umbrage. Would you rather I say nothing, let you select something totally pointless, and then be disappointed when I can’t produce a review worth reading because the game itself is so speciously thus considered as to be unworthy of comment? I suspect you would complain bitterly then, as well.
So, what is this, then, but a catch-22? When I warn you, you complain that I am trying to deter you from doing what you want, and if I say nothing and you select a stinker, it’s my fault for letting you blunder in without a warning.
One more thing,
OF COURSE I do not WANT to play a miserable game. Were it otherwise, would that not defeat the purpose of this whole endeavour? Be reasonable. I am obviously going to stump for FF7 as much as I can, because I think it is a wonderful game. It’s not MY job to select a misery, it’s yours.
But don’t keep thinking that ‘if it isn’t something that is hardly a game, it must be enjoyable instead!’. That’s ridiculous, and Deadly Towers is proof. You ABSOLUTELY CAN Select-a-Misery–even one I would deter you from selecting. But there are plenty of miseries that are WORTHY of comment. I think you should select one of those for your own sake.
Suggesting then that ‘It’s not a misery at all!’ is disingenous. WORTHY OF COMMENT is not the same thing as NOT MISERABLE.
]]>I heard the rationale about the ‘legit bad game’, but it’s a bit misleading to present titles that you can simply dismiss as ‘not bad by design’ or some such. And I understand the notion of ‘game made with the intent of cash in, not a failure of a genuine attempt to create a good game’, but really, it is called ‘Select a Misery’, and the first place the reader’s minds go is ‘What’s the most awful thing on this list?’
I frankly would rather you just put up a select a playthrough and list things you’re actually invested in. Otherwise it’s not going to be much of a showing, as people -are- going to take the ‘misery’ and believe it’s going to result in a Bup-like comedy review.
]]>@DiceMidshipman: It’s T20 not G20!
Re. the Halfway mark, don’t complain! At least we used it!
Trollhalla sounds like The Lost Vikings, except totally different.
No votes really coming in for the Select-a-Misery…
]]>This week’s panel
“Subjected to torments” Blitzmage
“Knocked out of the G20” Imitanis
“I’m back in high school” Lusipurr
Donators
Cumulative total record holder: Imitanis
Single Donation record holder: Brettsuo
Donators eligible for drawing:
Dancing Matt
DiceAdmiral
Absurdist Kobold
Drachonous
Brettsuo
Savante
Billy B.
Les E.
Martin B.
DefChaos
Feature: Select-A-Misery
Everyone Vote
Cliffy B’s new game: Bluestreak
I thought Gears of War was okay, but CB always comes across as a tremendous douche. Remember when he whined about review scores in the 80s for GoW3?
The bleep bloops
I actually don’t know where those come from. Where?
Mark Cerney working on indie title
Halfway there
Boo, the return of the halfway mark and it’s totally in the wrong spot.
Mighty number 9
More stuff I don’t want in a game I probably won’t buy.
The Grand Budapest Hotel
I agree that this is a fantastic film.
Gamestop unique DLC
While I’m against this entirely and haven’t been in a gamestop in over a year, this is a fairly clever way to try and keep themselves relevant.
Imitanis literature corner
Dirge without music
DiceAdmiral’s Brettsuo Gaming Moment
This week I played TrollHalla . It’s a game about Viking-esque Trolls raiding islands for plunder. There are bonuses for being the first to collect each type of loot. The main meat of the game is trying to load your Trolls onto boats to collect plunder and sending Trolls out to scout and to dictate which island the boats will sail too. The theme is a bit weak, and it looks like the game will be silly and lightweight but there’s a lot more going on here than there appears. Recomended as a lighter short length game.
@Matt: It’s just VLC, actually. The problem is that I actually need it to wipe its ‘playlist’ after every file is added, so that the playlist only has the current media in it. There’s no way to do this except to close the programme after each play, but this results in all sorts of problems because of the way in which audio is grabbed from the programme. Pfui!
]]>NEW AUDIO SYSTEM INDEED!
]]>The way it is set up right now, even at full volume I have to have my mouth on the mic to be picked up at all.
For some reason, with the new system, my mic is pre-amped considerably. I did not know this when we began recording, so I was talking onto the mic as usual. The result is… well, much worse than you hear it here. It was actually not something to which one could listen for more than a few moments Luckily, technology allowed me to salvage it (to some degree).
It’ll be better next week, but I won’t be doing the intro and outro lines live again. It’s a lot nicer if I take care of that in post production.
]]>I alone am responsible.
]]>
