Game Development Giant

It’s not just that “Game” gave “Pokemon” a score that other games cannot achieve miracles. Now the second largest game magazine in North America, “Player”, they issued a test score that took a week to play “Pokemon”. The reason is that the test editors were all immersed in this game and couldn't extricate themselves. They didn't wake up until game was released.

They also need to give Pokemon a review score.

It is also the first time for these senior editors of Player to experience a game that can attract review editors for a week but not be noticed by the editors. In order to compete with Game, Player does not always I agree with the views expressed above by Game. In fact, what they most often do is put forward views that are completely opposite to those of the editors of Game.

But on the matter of Pokemon, the two magazines, which were slightly opposed before, have a rare unified point of view. The forty-point system for game ratings was first initiated by Game. Later, this unique method was adopted. It has also been adopted by many other media. For example, Japan's largest game magazine Famitsu adopts the same scoring standards as Game.

Although Famitsu has never admitted this, their editor-in-chief said that this scoring method was independently researched by them. It can only be regarded as a coincidence that it is the same as the scoring method of Game. The so-called heroes think alike...ne That's right. Of course, this would be ridiculed and ridiculed by other media, but Famitsu just refused to admit the fact that it plagiarized Game, and later it gradually turned into a joke. Although the magazine Player refers to game in the design of many contents, they are rarely independent in rating the game. You know, because of the promotion of game, the game The forty-point scoring method has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people for a long time, and many players even take this scoring method for granted. As a game magazine, it is impossible for Player not to set up a game rating content, but completely plagiarizing this 40-point mechanism seems a bit too low-end.

Although at that time, almost all game media were adopting this scoring method.

Later, the editor-in-chief of Player thought that this forty-point scoring method was actually derived from the ten-point system, but each evaluation editor had a ten-point score. Finally, the scores were added up. Because there were a total of thinking assessment editors who assessed at the same time, it was said that it was forty points. Facts have proved that this scoring method was very popular immediately after it was launched.

In addition, Player magazine is unselfish in its game test scores. It has received support from many readers, and with the development of the past two years, it has finally become the second largest game magazine in North America. Its influence is second only to game.

This magazine does not exist in Jester's memory. He does not remember that in the history of his mind, such a magazine once existed in North America. Maybe this is his rebirth and the changes caused to the video game industry. Many things can no longer be referenced using his memory.

Player's review scores for Pokemon were released only after Gaem.

They gave a score that was more personal than the editors of Game. Many players believed that the reason why Game gave such a high score was just a compensatory mentality for making mistakes in previous evaluations. For the sake of function, Player did not consider the mood of the editors of Game at all.

They unscrupulously ridiculed the editor of gaem in the game's comments: We really can't figure out the reason why some people will only give this game a score of eight points at the beginning, because We, the test editors, were completely attracted to this game almost within ten minutes of being exposed to it. It is embarrassing for us to say that we are actually addicted to this game. We were so overwhelmed that we forgot about our work, so our review of Pokemon cannot be officially released until now.

Although this review is saying that they have done a very shameful thing, in fact, for readers, this is not a shameful thing. For a game test editor, they can be praised by a game It is an incredible thing to be so attracted that you forget your own job and devote yourself wholeheartedly to the game.

It can even be said that this is a deed worthy of bragging. In fact, Player magazine seized on Game's mistake this time and cleverly changed it to a mocking tone. The contrast between content and tone created in this way deepens the meaning.

As for the score of Pokemon, the editors of Player did not hesitate to give it a perfect score of 100 points.

As for why such a score is given, you must know that the ratings of Player magazine are very strict, and they have many more people participating in the rating than Game. Therefore, some people can often be rated in Game Games that get good scores on the Internet often fail in the player game. Of course, this is because the player is protesting against the game, and the reason for deliberately showing harshness is, but it is more because although As the number of people participating in scoring increases, the development of a game will also increase. In this way, a small loophole will be expanded infinitely by one or a few editors.

So the score will be given very low.

In fact, since Player was first published two years ago, there has never been a game that can be higher than Game if converted into 40 points.

To be precise, before Pokemon.

The most ironic thing is that in the final comment, Gamer quoted the comment from Game on their special account for Pokemon, modified it slightly, and used it directly. , and still in the same sarcastic tone.

We also can't think of any game that can keep so many people addicted to it for more than a hundred hours and still have endless fun. There is even the most trivial reason for not getting a perfect score.

Such comments are just mocking Game magazine for covering up their previous wrong judgment on Pokemon, and the two points deducted just mean that this game still has shortcomings, precisely because of its advantages. The shortcomings caused our test editors to make wrong judgments during the evaluation.

But the problem is, the editors of Player are unceremoniously explaining that for a game that allows players to discover new fun for more than a hundred hours without interruption, any shortcomings are irrelevant, because a game is good or not. Fun is made up of its advantages. As for its shortcomings, they only have a little effect if they are not outstanding enough.

And when a game is good enough, then you only need to look at their advantages.

After all, for players, what they want to know most about a game is how fun it is, not how bad it is. Pokemon is such a game. The game is not without its shortcomings, nor is it perfect, but in the face of the nature of the game, these things are irrelevant.

What’s important about a game is whether it’s fun or not, not how many shortcomings it has that haven’t been perfected yet. In fact, in our understanding, a perfect game is not the same thing as a game with no shortcomings at all. It is not a contradiction, here we have an example, Pokemon is a perfect game, its game content is so rich, even the editors of our evaluation have an average of no less than 100 Hours of play time can't fully explore it.

But does this game have no shortcomings? That's not the case, but this is already an irrelevant thing. If we have to say one thing about this game, the thing that our editor can't stand is why Mars Entertainment made such a big decision about Pokemon this time. Such a strange restriction.

That is, in this game, the game content will be divided into two parts, namely Pokemon Red Version and Pokemon Blue Version. Among these two versions, each version has another version. There are no Pokemon that can be captured. These Pokemon even include some of the most powerful mythical beasts. Moreover, some of the rarest mythical beasts will only appear in specific locations when the two parties have different versions of the connection. probability of appearing.