Blog Post #2 - Brett Luft

Earlier today I found the Kotaku review of a video game known as 007 Legends. This post was interesting to me because most video game reviews have a lot of controversy surrounding them. I knew that Kotaku had a comment section, so I began to look into the post further.

The review that Kotaku made for the game was somewhat negative, so I expected to find angry comments towards the author. I was surprised, however, and I found that most comments agreed with the author.

Creepy.Woody writes: Shooting, shooting, shooting, quick time event, shooting shooting shooting.

Same as the god damned Goldeneye remake but much shorter, with dumber AI and more Call of Duty style game play thrown in. But even that was somewhat enjoyable. This game is as bland and boring as they come. 

Bond deserves better.

JigMcGalliger writes: CoD killed 007.

Michael Lewis writes: Just give me an HD remake of Goldeneye 64 that all it does is update graphics and physics and I'm ok. Don't redo something that is still awesome today. I want my amazing game back!

These are three examples of commenters agreeing with the author of the article. The commenters use both their real names, in the case of Michael Lewis, and pseudonyms such as JigMcGalliger and Creepy.Woody.

I do not believe that the use of pseudonyms in the case of a video game blog is necessarily a bad thing, as gamers use pseudonyms on a regular basis. Services like Xbox Live and Steam promote their users to user pseudonyms to protect their identity and create a gamer-friendly atmosphere. With Kotaku users using pseudonym, it gives the impression of an extension of the video game world.

The commenters also feel that their opinion matters to readers. Some readers use websites like Kotaku to find out how other gamers feel about specific games or news. The commenters speak freely as gamers so that others can determine how to spend their money. In this case, the commenters don't believe the specific game is worth the money of the average consumer.

Not all readers appreciated Kotaku's review of the game. Some commenters called Kotaku and its writers out for the amount of time that it took to publish the review.

TheCowboyPoet writes: Here's my problem with Kotaku reviews. Every other gaming site had this review posted a week ago, and the consensus was the same: don't buy this game. Isn't paying Patricia to essentially tell everyone what they already know a little redundant? I'd like to see more reviews posted at the same time as the Joystiq/1Up/Destructoid/IGN etc reviews. Just a thought.

This user also used a pseudonym, but referenced other communities he was involved in and compared Kotaku to them. He felt that Kotaku as a company had slacked in publishing the article, and even questioned why the author had a job. In this case the use of a pseudonym could be justified as a means to protect the commenters identity.

Not all commenters had something negative to say. Instead of insulting the developer of 007 Legends or Kotaku, they offered constructive criticism for future use.

Phil Tomlinson writes: Give IO Interactive a shot at Bond. A Hitman derivative, tailored for 007, would be the best at capturing the style and feel of the series. The opera scene in QoS or nabbing the hotel security tape in Casino Royale are exactly the kind of scenarios they know how to work into a game, and as much I hate to pigeonhole a developer, we'd at least have a games that lets you be Bond rather than, as you say, a Navy Seal. 

Plus we could get some fun takes on classic Bond, like the way villains would constantly allow Bond to live and even walk around their compound freely with a complement of gadgets - why Blofeldt didn't shoot Bond the second he turned up in that floating hamster ball in Diamonds Are Forever is beyond me. Having the chance to play along, make some witty small talk with a dialogue wheel then crack out some knock-out gas or an elbow to the face and scamper off would be pretty excellent.

gnarkiller76 writes: Did you try the multiplayer? it's supposedly a little better than the singleplayer game, but I have heard complaints the run button doesn't work a lot of the time.

In these two cases, the commenters offered neutral constructive criticism to either the developers/publishers or the author of the article. In the case of Phil Tomlinson, he still has hopes for the franchise and urges other studios to take a stab at the development of these Bond games.

Gnarkiller76, on the other hand, feels that the author and commenters could explore other areas of the game to get their value.

In all cases, the users used fairly coherent english to voice their opinion on the matters at hand. This proved to be very effective in their speech, because their arguments could easily be followed.

Kotaku's Original Post: http://kotaku.com/5953642/007-legends-the-kotaku-review