Profanity in Dm

Opinion from Matt - Tuesday, 08 November 2011 @ 2:57am

I am sitting now, watching Uncharted 3. I mention watching rather than playing not because it's a remarkable interactive experience and I chose a different verb advisedly on the basis that the gameplay experience has shifted from an active one to something almost passive. No. Nor am I watching my housemate, Ben "Yahtzee" Crowshaw, paramount reviewer in all of the world, discussing nuances of game design and being oh, so witty.

I specifically say "watch" because the cunt isn't fucking working.

So here's a question.

When a gamer comes home drunk from a night of fun times that may or may not have involved identical twins called Jenny and Susan respectively, and one wants to play the latest incarnation of one's favourite game series... what should happen?

Is it reasonable to expect that it works?

Is it reasonable to think that an attempt to load one's save should result in something not unlike, mayhap akin to actually loading one's save? Is it reasonable to think that sitting here staring at a spinning ring for 20 fucking minutes may be not the ideal conclusion to this particular scenario?

Is it reasonable to conclude that this whole enterprise can feel free to lick my very own slowly spinning ring, and possibly (if necessary) slurp a small amount of sweaty balls right along with it?

Uncharted 3 is an exclusive for Playstation 3 and it should work with that single platform without failure. And yet the Playstation forums are filled with people complaining of similar (or, much like my twins, identical) issues.

I want to like Uncharted 3. I really do. Actually, you know what. Fuck that. I don't want to like it. I was liking it. I was actively liking it. I was trying to like it more, harder, and deeper. What I WANT to do is play the fucking thing.

I don't get a lot of gaming time. I play maybe 1/10 games I want to play. And I can't afford to just dismiss the roughly 5 hours of gameplay I put into this title on the basis of "bad save start again lol".

As a gamer that shits me to the point where I want to write angry letters to my local representative that include words like "furphy" and "miscreant" As a less than kind human being I want to drench my pain in blood, the blood of the innocent. But as a reviewer I want to know what the fuck am I supposed to do now?

Do I review the gameplay experience I have had? Here's my review:

It was really quite good right up until the point it shat the bed and now I can't play it any more.

Or do I patiently and professionally start again, ditching hours of play and then make "some minor errors in actually being playable" a bullet point in the "cons" of our review? Oh. Yes. And minus 3% for "not fucking working". How many percent is "able to play the game" worth, by the way? I'd think quite a lot.

Despite my refuge in profantiy, the question is serious and ongoing. When a reviewers experience is littered with bugs how much can that be a factor in the review?And in particular when a significant game is marred by a bug that (such as my case) renders the game utterly unplayable, does the game deserve to be painted with a brush tarred by that bug?

Should a reviewer, one of many to play the game, one of the few to have issues, actually stand up and represent the masses who struggled with the combination of this bug and incredibly bad grammar on the forums? Do we stand up and say "You know what? Your game gets a 2/10. For all those who can't play it. Fuck your Metacritic."

I am confused, and as ever ask for the wisdom of the internet.

Edit: An update seems to have done the trick, but the question remains, and comes up surprisingly often. How much should a reviewer's personal difficulties affect the review?