This Week in Xbox — 5/23

No, AzBat, we are NOT making the same point:
YOU are saying that now that XBLA titles have a chance to be taken off the shelf, OXM should be careful how mean they are to them.
00
I'M saying your point makes no sense because EVERY OTHER title has been on the chopping block since day one. Retailers routinely streamline their shelf space to make room for titles that SELL. OXM isn't responsible for that.
00
The job of the critic is, for lack of a better word, critical. They're the official taster of the kingdom. It's THEIR job to keep US from poisoning ourselves with crappy products!
00
Everyday these brave men and women of all ages and creeds put their bodies and brains (and, oft times, their wallets!) on the line to protect us from getting crapped on. They waste valuable hours of their lives sitting thru some of the most horrid shit mankind/corporations have ever come up with - time they will NEVER GET BACK, mind you - just so they can warn the rest of us to find a better way to spend our hard-earned cash. You should be on your hands and knees kissing the ground these poor souls walk on for all the crap they've had to put up with in your name - and they don't even KNOW you!
00
Trust me, a critic doesn't WANT to go out of their way to trash their subject - just the opposite! Like you and me, when they plunk down their money, they want to be entertained. They want to LOVE the experience they're about to be a party to, who doesn't?
00
Unfortunately, they are often betrayed by a product so heinous, it's just BEGGING for a killing; so they do their best to do just that. Gleefully! For OUR benefit.
00
Critics are only human, however, which means they are full of strange foibles and weird tastes; just like us. One man's reasoned opinion is another man's heresy. Ultimately, as it always HAS been, it's up to the consumer to make up her own mind.
00
Calling the critic "egotistical" because he doesn't care about what happens to a product after he has given it a low score just shows that you don't understand what a critic does. Of COURSE he doesn't care about shitty product - he cares about the poor consumer BUYING said shitty product! He CARES that YOU might just be subjected to the same shitty experience HE just had to suffer thru.
00
The critic's responsibility is to give his reader/viewer-ship his honest opinion about a product. He is NOT responsible for the product; if he WERE, there would be a conflict of interests - mainly OURS. Of course he HOPES that his opinion will not only save his public from getting hosed in crapware, but that it may inspire publishers to do better by us in the future.
00
To suggest that OXM has ANY more pull than every other gaming publication out there... Well, I'm sure OXM would like to think so, but they know they don't, "official" or not. The fact that the "Spider-Man 3" game was a blockbuster title while "Psychonauts" made bupkus is proof enough. Their opinions are ignored just as much as every OTHER critic's (no offense, guys - y'know I love you!)...
00
00
It should also be noted that "de-list" does NOT mean "erase" - the XBLA game will still be on the server for those people who already own it, it just won't be available for sale anymore. And that makes me sad not at all.
00
gt: cart00nstrip

That was the point of my comment. OXM's reviews have ALWAYS had effect on a title. Considering they are the official magazine I believe it has the potential to have a larger effect on people's purchasing decisions than other magazines. The problem I've had is that I don't think OXM has always been truthful or fair in their reviews. Most of the time they have, but there have been more than a couple of instances where their score was either HIGHER or LOWER than the norm by a considerate amount. In the past it just made OXM's score look like the odd man out. No harm, no foul. Unfortunately now, that's not the case anymore. Those out of the norm scores can now either keep games on the Live Arcade service or knock them out. I'm just asking OXM to be mindful of that now because their score now has more repercussions than before. For them to not care just shows me that they're egotistical. BTW, for those that think Space Giraffe is gone, it's not. It's MetaCritic score is 68. It got lucky, but there are others that won't be.

I'm confused - when HASN'T OXM's review scores had an effect on whether or not a game gets "delisted"? Their scores (as part of the many other opinions out there) have always had a small effect on whether games sell or not, and when a game doesn't sell, it stops being shipped out. XBLA should be no different.
00
However, I'm loathe to read about the potential backlash involving those poor saps with the lack of enough taste to actually LIKE this crapware. If they've already bought it, they should continue to be able to have access to it...
00
As far as Capcom's foray into film, I understand that both of these properties will not only be created in-house, but that they will be totally CG films. Haven't they been making these ever since RE was created? They've been making little FMV movies for years - now they want to create a studio that focuses on the more theatrical parts of the game? Why not? Give 'em the benefit of the doubt - at least THIS time they're in control of their own IPs!
00
gt: cart00nstrip

I agree with Dan. If a game is taken off it was Microsoft not OXM. People should not blame OXM if a horrible game like Space Girafe is taken off. I really would like to know who are still playing horrible Arcade games even if they made them. I belive that the conversation rate criteria will save some cult favorites but the truly bad games must go. OXM should just keep on doing what they are doing, reviewing games in a truthful way.
:)

If a low score causes Microsoft to delist a game...then that's Microsoft's decision, not my scoring criteria. I'm here to say whether a game is worth two things: your time and your money. Absolutely everything else is someone else's baggage.

Umm... didn't they have a trilogy of Resident Evil movies? Those were forgettable enough, why do more?