Dark Souls Review

[arbok]

hmmm - i dont understand why u need official approval to get a 10 from PALGN.

is the editorial crew worried that if they posted a 10 you would get heaps of people go out and buy the game and then find its not a game they like because its super unforgiving? and then therefore they won't read PALGN reviews again?

this is ridiculous - how can anyone trust review scores on this site if its not actually the score that the reviewer chose. PALGN didn't play the game, Denny played the game. i've heard of sites boosting review scores to please software publishers. i've never heard of a site downgrade their score.

i'm not arguing over a '10' - I'm arguing over whether a reviewer has ownership over his review. Denny played the game and couldn't even put the score he wanted on it.
_________________

With Thanks to Admeister for the Avatar and Sig!!
Xbox Live: arbok26
PSN: arbok26

[Jeremy]

The need for editorial approval of a score of 9 and above has been in place on PALGN since day one, since before either Adam or myself were editors. There are a couple of reasons why this is in place. Firstly, it’s very easy to get too excited over a review score and slap a 9 onto something that tickled your fancy. So for any score that is above 9, it’s asked of all the writers to strongly consider and articulate whether this is the correct score to reflect the game. This leads to the second reason, which is that a gaming website judged primarily on its high scores. As editors, it’s our job to make sure that the scores are reflecting both the site policies in place and to ensure the integrity of the site’s standing amongst others is kept – which at the end of the day, is a judgement call.

Any thing 8.5 and below, I’ve never asked anyone to change their score, and while over 90% of the 9+ scores given are indeed approved. Of the ones that aren’t, I’ve never asked a writer to change a score more than half a point. Never, have I said to a writer “this is not a 9, it’s a 6”. Furthermore, unlike past editors, I don’t actively change the content of a writer’s review. Every single review that I’ve validated is virtually completely the work of the original writer.

With Dark Souls, I made a judgement call. Amongst the above reasons I had for this call was that I felt that that a 9.5 was an appropriate score was that I felt that the scoring description behind a 9.5 was the most suitable for it: The best of the best, a must buy title for almost all gamers. State of the art technically, and an artistic marvel. Creative gameplay mechanics, and level design beyond reproach. A game guaranteed to be shortlisted for 'game of the year'.

Did I make the right judgement? Well, that is for you, the community, to decide. I’m only human at the end of the day and will make mistakes; sometimes I’ll let through a score that’s too high, and others one will go too low. PALGN has maintained a stance, from day one, that only the most extraordinary of titles will receive the very best scores. And as long as I’m the editor, I’ll continue to uphold this legacy. However, if it was the case that I was wrong with my judgement with Dark Souls, I’m not going to shirk away from it and make excuses. If you think that I’ve made the wrong call, I can accept that.

What I won’t accept though, are completely ill-informed accusations that the published reviews and scores are anything but what the writer has done. Aside from what I’ve mentioned above, my philosophy behind the editorial direction of PALGN affords the writers more freedom than has been under past editors or any other major site, for that matter. The content of the review is purely the writer’s property, the control on scoring is minimal and I’ve been the most lenient when it comes to expectations and commitment to any past editor. Just about everything that a writer could have wanted, be it content, scores, original features, attending industry events, time off, understanding of circumstances; it’s all there for those who wish to accept it.

However, as an editor, I’ll still take the job that has been given to me (which I took at a time when the site was on the verge of collapse and no one else wanted it) seriously and in line with the legacy and standards set by PALGN. I made a judgement call, and if you believe I was wrong, you are entitled to that. And I accept that. Soon you’ll all see though that there’s more at stake than the difference between a 9.5 and a 10.

My PM box is always open if anyone would like to further discuss this in private.
_________________

[ManeKast]

^^
For me some of the drame rate niggles in Blighttown so far have slightly annoyed me a tiny amount. Still though, it has only been an annoyance and hasnt detracted from the core gameplay so........ if we had a percentile system it would be easy, 9.9/10.

What I am interested in is this statment at the end of (above) ;

[Jeremy]

^Yes, the chances are that I will be reviewing it, but no, that was not what I was referring to.
_________________

[mezz]

great review, this game rocks!

[Dreamcazman]

Great review!

I'm roughly about half way through, not finding it too hard, but then again I played and finished Demon's Souls.

[drinniol]

I'm gonna be skipping this one. With only an hour of game time a day I don't think I'd have too much fun.

[Cerebral]

Personally, I'd knock off at least 0.5 for the worst implementation of Havok ever.
_________________

My play-asia affiliate link (I may as well be honest about this)

[Jeremy]

Upon reflection, I have decided the change the score back to the original score that Denny submitted. I came to the conclusion that the reasons and judgements behind my original decision were neither sufficient nor justifiable. Furthermore, I did not handle the situation between myself and Denny as I should have. And I accept full responsibility it.

PALGN belongs to the writers, and to the community, not solely to my uninformed and out-of-touch opinions.

I would like to apologise to Denny, for how I handled the situation, and to the community for not providing them with the review that truly reflected the title.

[Benza]

Takes a big man to admit he was wrong.

Much respect for that Jeremy.
_________________

[Fetidchimp]

well i didn't see any of that coming.
_________________
kill, kill, kill.....the white man. Kill the white man, kill

[Cyph]

While I respect your honesty Jeremy I believe the previous score, 9.5/10, was more fitting. The wonky physics, while not game breaking, references one area that could have been improved since Demons Souls. And the frame rates, that can dip seriously in some sections of the game to the point where it affects game play is an example of a game breaking failure. And lastly, some of the glitches used by people to farm souls and affect online play is another failure. 9.5 was fitting.

[grim-one]

Wow two 10s in a week or so? Crazy. And I've not got either of the games yet!

Has PALGN ever given out a 10 before?
_________________

Steam:grim_one | PSN/Live:najakh | Flickr

[Jahanzeb]

To Resident Evil 4 (Gamecube) and Mario Galaxy
_________________

Now Playing:
Sonic Generations

[Fetidchimp]

and elf bowling
_________________
kill, kill, kill.....the white man. Kill the white man, kill

[grim-one]

[ZeroX03]

I'd give Dark Souls a 9.5 just because of the atrocious frame dipping.
_________________


b+2,1 mindgames

[ManeKast]

A 10! Awesome, I agree the framerate issues are there but this game overcomes it by being so exceedingly ambitious and awesome!

YAY
_________________

PSN/XBL/Steam: ManeKast
Kudos to Fetidchimp for the sig.

[arbok]

Good work Jeremy.

And I also think that Denny (and other PALGN writers) have enough experience to 'accurately' put a score on the game they played based on the PALGN rating system.
_________________

With Thanks to Admeister for the Avatar and Sig!!
Xbox Live: arbok26
PSN: arbok26