Oftentimes online publications have a habit of hyping media. Take your average videogame website, which clears publishers and developers of all previous transgressions upon their proclamation that a new title is en route. Typically speaking, poor talent produces a poor product. Uwe Boll can’t direct. Paris Hilton can’t act. These things are known to movie critics and those writing about the movie industry and their expectations are curtailed to suit the cast, directors, and producers attached to a project. But for whatever reason videogames are exempt from this level of clairvoyance. Game developer x put out a godawful, unplayable piece of %^$# last year, but we’ll preview the latest title from them as though it will revolutionize the industry. This is an accepted practice; rarely, if ever, will a game critic invoke the names of those behind a title unless it ends in Carmack, Meier, or Molyneaux. It’s a self-perpetuating industry that relies on the redemptive quality of ‘the review’ and everything up until then is assumed to be pure ambrosia; expectations are fuelled while the default position is that a game is perfect until proven otherwise. This is somewhat reasonable in the sense that a game is a constantly developing, evolving piece of work. But so is a film and when Uwe Boll’s name is attached to it, I know, even as a casual movie-goer, that expectations should be lowered. So what happened to the “amazing” “impressive” and ‘stunning’ Star Wars: The Force Unleashed?
LucasArts is the developer behind the title, just as they have produced all other Star Wars titles. And there is a reputation that follows this name; Escape from Monkey Island, Grim Fandango, these are critically acclaimed titles. And they’re both over eight years old. A quick purview of metacritic.com lists LucasArts at 73% over the past seven years (across PS2, Xbox, PS3 and 360). At the bottom of the list is a title called RTX Red Rock at 49% and topping the list is Gladius at 79%. And where does the much hyped Star Wars: The Force Unleashed factor in? 68% and 71% PS3 and Xbox 360 respectively. That’s below average for even LucasArts. And yet the pure hype behind the title seemed to demand a 9/10 as a bare minimum. Here’s what some preview’s had to say:
“We’d be very surprised if the game isn’t extremely impressive by the time release rolls around” – IGN
“The Force Unleashed is looking to be an amazing action title”-GameSpy
“Should be an absolute stunner when it finally ships on the PS3 and Xbox 360 later this year”-GameSpot
These catch phrases are merely a sampling of the broader rampant hyping that takes place in video game previews across the board. And for whatever reason this sort of unsolicited hype is actually condoned for professionals in the video game industry. Why?! Never is a book or a movie presumed to be “an absolute stunner” before it’s even finished. GameSpot gave the final copy a 7 out of 10, citing “simply awful” gameplay experiences. That’s a pretty stark transition.
My gripe is not with the score of The Force Unleashed, I too wrote a piece about the technology in the game and the potential it had to craft an incredible experience. But the key there is potential, a la GameSpy’s closing comments on their preview: “Hopefully, LucasArts will kick ass itself and deliver on that potential come summer” (emphasis added).
Only in the video game industry can a critic spend a few hours with a title and invoke the phrases ‘extremely impressive,’ ‘amazing action title,’ and ’an absolute stunner.’ Gamers themselves can generate enough hype on their own. What we need from game critics is a clear, unbiased view and anything else is just plain poor journalism.
I don’t tend to go by the reviews on these sites and this is exactly why. I have heard this exact same thing from my friends that are into gaming.