Ranking Absurdities

I visited Game Rankings.com the other day and checked out the rankings for Racing Games. N2K2 was ranked 9th, behind GP3, Nascar 4(!), GPL, Motorcross Madness among others. Apparently, N2K2 was given less than stellar marks by some reviewers who felt the game didn't bring enough that was 'new' to the table. Now, whether or not one is a fan of oval racing, there's a consensus that N2K2 represents the current state-of-the-art among driving sims. A game should stand on its own merits whether or not it's entirely 'new' or merely an enhancement of the previous version. Game reviewers are performing a disservice to potential buyers by indicating by their grading that the new iteration isn't quite up to snuff. If they feel the new version is lacking in the novelty dep't, and I don't agree in the case of N4/N2K2, and thus not worth the full purchase price they should indicate this in the body of the review and not downgrade the product with a mediocre grade. It's misleading I also noticed that G. Crammond seems immune to this'repackaging penalty'.

welcome to the world of subjectivity and "let's please our advertisers".... -- The first ever pinball ezboard !! http://pub7.ezboard.com/bpinball "Peter Ford" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message de news: p7iV8.292674$[email hidden]... > I visited Game Rankings.com the other day and checked out the rankings for > Racing Games. N2K2 was ranked 9th, behind GP3, Nascar 4(!), GPL, Motorcross > Madness among others. Apparently, N2K2 was given less than stellar marks by > some reviewers who felt the game didn't bring enough that was 'new' to the > table. > > Now, whether or not one is a fan of oval racing, there's a consensus that > N2K2 represents the current state-of-the-art among driving sims. A game > should stand on its own merits whether or not it's entirely 'new' or merely > an enhancement of the previous version. Game reviewers are performing a > disservice to potential buyers by indicating by their grading that the new > iteration isn't quite up to snuff. If they feel the new version is lacking > in the novelty dep't, and I don't agree in the case of N4/N2K2, and thus not > worth the full purchase price they should indicate this in the body of the > review and not downgrade the product with a mediocre grade. It's misleading > > I also noticed that G. Crammond seems immune to this'repackaging penalty'. > > > >

On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 14:33:57 GMT, "Peter Ford" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I visited Game Rankings.com the other day and checked out the rankings for >Racing Games. N2K2 was ranked 9th, behind GP3, Nascar 4(!), GPL, Motorcross >Madness among others. Apparently, N2K2 was given less than stellar marks by >some reviewers who felt the game didn't bring enough that was 'new' to the >table. This might sound a little controversial, but please bear with me. I don't agree with the rankings mentioned, but I consider the online play for Motocross Madness 1 and 2 superior to the NASCAR games, and therefore wind up playing them more. Motocross Madness 2 has much less strict physics, but there is enough of the spirit of MX there for it to work, and you still have to learn the tracks well to be effective... Tracks that are way more varied than those in the NASCAR offerings. As for NASCAR Racing 2002, everyone agrees the Sierra servers are a waste of time, and we can't even seem to keep an informal league of purists together here because of the spats over wrecking and poor driving. If you distance yourself from the community and look at that, it says one thing... The multiplayer kind of stinks. Not on a technical standpoint, just for what it is.

"Tim O" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 14:33:57 GMT, "Peter Ford" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I visited Game Rankings.com the other day and checked out the rankingsfor > >Racing Games. N2K2 was ranked 9th, behind GP3, Nascar 4(!), GPL,Motorcross > >Madness among others. Apparently, N2K2 was given less than stellar marksby > >some reviewers who felt the game didn't bring enough that was 'new' tothe

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >table. > > This might sound a little controversial, but please bear with me. > I don't agree with the rankings mentioned, but I consider the online > play for Motocross Madness 1 and 2 superior to the NASCAR games, and > therefore wind up playing them more. > > Motocross Madness 2 has much less strict physics, but there is enough > of the spirit of MX there for it to work, and you still have to learn > the tracks well to be effective... Tracks that are way more varied > than those in the NASCAR offerings. > > As for NASCAR Racing 2002, everyone agrees the Sierra servers are a > waste of time, and we can't even seem to keep an informal league of > purists together here because of the spats over wrecking and poor > driving. > > If you distance yourself from the community and look at that, it says > one thing... The multiplayer kind of stinks. > Not on a technical standpoint, just for what it is.

Get in a good league, and it leaves everything else in the dust............WAAAY in the dust :) Judging it by Sierra.com and the Rascar races isn't a very good yardstick. John >

"John Pancoast" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Get in a good league, and it leaves everything else in the > dust............WAAAY in the dust :) Judging it by Sierra.com and the > Rascar races isn't a very good yardstick. > > John > Couldn't agree with you more, John. The one league I race in is the best online racing I've EVER been involved with. -- Colin ICQ 25485061 FFRL Triv: http://www.chbr18476.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ FFRL: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/fastfood/ffrl/index.html